S.K. Verma, J. - (1.) The facts giving rise to these appeals are common and therefore they can be conveniently disposed of by one judgment.
(2.) The undisputed facts giving rise to the two appeals are as follows. There Is a commercial establishment, called Hind Trading and Manufacturing Company (Private), Ltd., situate on P. Road in the city of Kanpur. B.S. Jain, the respondent in the two appeals, is the managing director of this commercial establishment (hereinafter referred to as the establishment). In the area in which the establishment is situate, Tuesday is observed as a close day in shops and commercial establishments. On 10 September 1958 B.S. Jain sent the following letter to the Chief Inspector of Shops and Commercial Establishments, Kanpur: Dear Sir, This is to bring to your notice that our establishment shall remain open on 11 September 1956, for a couple of hours as we have to prepare certain important statements for incometax and also for our annual audit. Sarvsri C.V.S. Krishan, V.S. Baiwar and Jag Narain who are our employees will be required to come on duty on the above date and they would toe paid overtime at the prescribed rates. Yours faithfully, (Sd.)(Illegible), Managing Director, for Hind Trading and Manufacturing Company (Private), Ltd.
(3.) On 2 November 1958 the Deputy Chief Inspector of Shops and Commercial Establishments, Uttar Pradesh, filed two complaints against the respondent. In one of the complaints the allegation was that the respondent had opened his establishment on Tuesday, 11 September 1956, the weekly close day for the area, in contravention of Section 10 of the Uttar Pradesh Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 3947, read with Rules 5 and 6 of the Uttar Pradesh Shops and Commercial Establishments Rules, 1947, and thereby rendered himself liable to punishment under Section 27 of the Act. Tins complaint gave rise to summary trial Ho, 674 of 195fi. In the other complaint the allegation against the respondent was that he had not allowed weekly rest to his employees, Sarvsri Baiwar, C.V.S. Krishan and Jag Narain on, 11 September 1956 in contravention of 8.12 of the Uttar Pradesh Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1947, read with Rule 8 of the Uttar Pradesh Shops and Commercial Establishments Rules, 1947, and had thus rendered himself liable to punishment under Section 27 of the Act. Out of this complaint arose summary trial No. 766 of 1956. Both cases were tried summarily by Sri B.N. Rai, Magistrate, First Class, Kanpur, and the respondent was acquitted in both the cases. Government Appeal No. 520 of 1957 has been filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh against the acquittal of the respondent in case No. 674 of 1956 and Government Appeal No. 521 of 1957 has arisen out of the trial, namely, 766 of 1956.;