- (1.) U. S. Tripathi, J. Applicant Hari Prakash has filed this revision against the judgment and order dated 22-5-1986 passed by the Sessions Judge, Azamgarh in Criminal Appeal No. 23 of 1986, dismissing the appeal and confirming his conviction under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act and modifying sentence of eight months R. I. to three months R. I. and fine of Rs. 2,000/- recorded by the Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh.
(2.) THE prosecution story, briefly stated, was that on 17-3-1980 at about 3 p. m. Shri Kamal Ram, Sub- Divisional Magistrate/enforcement Officer, Phulpur along with Sri Ishwar Chandra Gupta, Supply Inspector and other officials checked the shop of the applicant situated at Sikraur, P. S. Sarai Mir, District Azamgarh and found that he had stored 33 bags of rice (16 bags full of Arwa rice, 13 half bags of Arwa rice, 3 bags Arwa rice weighing about 70 kgs. each) and nine bags Bhujia rice. THE applicant was unable to show any licence for dealing in the business of foodgrains. THE storage of more than ten quintals of rice was violation of Clause 3 (2) of U. P. Foodgrains Dealers' (Licensing and Restriction on Hoarding) Order, 1976, hereinafter called Foodgrains Order of 1976 framed Section 3 and punishable under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. Accordingly, the above foodgrains were seized and recovery memo was prepared. A report of this effect was lodged at police station Sarai Mir. THE police after investigation submitted charge-sheet against the applicant. The applicants was tried by Special Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh. During trial the prosecution examined Shri Kamal Ram, S. D. M. (PW 1), Shri Radhey Shyam, Steno (PW 2), and Constable Ram Chandra Tiwari (PW 3 ). Head Constable Janardan Misra was examined as (CW 1 ). The contention of the applicant was that the above foodgrains were produce of his personal cultivation and he was not engaged in purchase or sale of foodgrains. The applicant examined Aditya (DW 1) in his defence.
(3.) THE learned Magistrate on considering evidence of the prosecution held that the applicant had violated the provisions of Clause 3 (2) of Foodgrains Order of 1976 and, therefore, committed an offence punishable under Section 3/7 E. C. Act. He further held that the applicant had also not displayed the rate board and stock board and, therefore, he violated the provisions of Clause 3 U. P. Essential Commodities (Display of Prices and Stocks and Control of Supply and Distribution) Order, 1977. With these findings he convicted him under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act and sentenced to undergo R. I. for a period of eight months and to pay fine of Rs. 1,500/ -. Aggrieved with the above conviction and sentence the applicant filed appeal before the Sessions Judge. The learned Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal with the modification of the sentence by reducing eight months RI into three months simple imprisonment and enhanced fine of Rs. 1,500 to 2000/ -.;