BHADRA KUMAR JAIN Vs. STATE
LAWS(ALL)-1976-10-52
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on October 18,1976

Bhadra Kumar Jain Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

P.N. Bakshi, J. - (1.) THIS is an application under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure.
(2.) THE applicant is being prosecuted for violation of Rule 9 of the U.P. Essential Commodities (Price Display and Control of Supply and Distribution) Order, 1975. The prosecution case is that on 9th July, 1975 Kanhaiya Lal Azad, Supply Inspector went to the shop of the applicant. He found that six copies by name Jain Bhugol Abhyas Pustika were sold to one Balak Ram, but no receipt had been issued for the same. The price of these six copies, according to the applicant, as sworn in para 4 of the uncontroverted affidavit filed on this behalf, is Rs. 4.50 only. The statement of Balak Ram was taken on the spot. In paragraph 5 of the affidavit it is averred that Balak Ram had stated that he neither paid the price of these copies, nor demanded any receipt.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the applicant has submitted that under Rule 7(3) of the aforesaid control order it is not necessary to issue a receipt or invoice unless demanded in case the total amount charged from a purchaser does not exceed Rs. 5/ - in respect of any one scheduled commodity.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.