- (1.) The appellants have been convicted under Ss. 7 and 9 of the Essential Supplies Act (No. 24 of 1946) on two counts. The first appellant is a registered joint stock company, the Seksaria Mills Ltd. It was fined Rs. 10,000 on each of the two counts, that is to say, a total fine of Rs. 20,000, and this was upheld in appeal. The second appellant is the Director of the Mills. He was sentenced to two months' rigorous imprisonment and to a fine of Rs, 2,00,000 on each count. In appeal the sentence of imprisonment was set aside and the fine reduced to Rs, 10,000 on each count. The third appellant is the General Manager of the Mills. He was sentenced to a fine of Rs. 2,000 on each count. This has been upheld. The fourth appellant is the Sales Manager of the Mills. He was sentenced to four months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,00,000 on each count. In appeal the sentence of imprisonment was upheld but the fine was reduced to Rs. 10,000 on each count. The substantive sentences are to run concurrently.
(2.) A Government of India Notification dated 2-2-1946 required every manufacturer to submit "true and accurate information relating to his undertakings" to the Textile commissioner C. S. T. Section at Bombay. In compliance with this Order, the first appellant submitted a return, signed by the third appellant, on 10-3-1947. This return is Ex. A-1. It showed that 13 bales of cloth (20 half bales and 3 full bales) were delivered to Messrs. Dwarkadas Khetan and Company of Bombay during the month of February 1947 on behalf of title quota-holder Shree Kishan and Company. Another return of the same date (Ex. A-2), also relating to the month of February 1947, showed that 6 bales were delivered to the same Dwarkadas Khetan and Company on behalf of another quota-holder Beharilal Bairathi.
(3.) A note on the back of each printed form states: "By 'delivered' or 'delivery' is meant physical delivery of cloth in bales or in pieces but not cloth which though paid for is still in the physical possession of the seller." The offence charged is that this information is not true and accurate. The case for the prosecution is that the bales remained in the physical possession of the first appellant at all material times and were not physically delivered to Messrs. Dwarkadas Khetan and Company.;