Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J. - (1.) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgement and order dated 18th January, 1994 passed by the learned Judge, Special Court, Burdwan in T.R. Case no. 81 of 1990 by which the appellant was convicted under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act and sentenced to suffer rigorous punishment of two years and to pay fine of Rs.2000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous punishment of six months and to confiscate the seized paddy to the State.
(2.) The prosecution case in short is that Sub-Inspector Nirmalendu Mukherjee of D.E.B. (S), Burdwan submitted a written complaint to the Officer-in-Charge, Madhabdihi Police Station stating, inter alia, that on 30th May, 1990 between 9.15 and 11.30 hours he along with Constable no. 2726 Rama Prasad Bose under the supervision of D.E.O. (I), Sadar, Burdwan conducted a raid at Pahalanpur within Madhabdihi Police Station and detected huge paddy in the premises of the accused/appellant at Pahalanpur just to the western side of main road. The appellant took to the heels on the sight of the police party and the Police Officer found the weighment equipment at his business premises. He called two local witnesses namely, Debipada Pal and Dibakar Mirdah, both of Pahalanpur and entered into the business premises, where he detected huge stock of loose paddy along with 43 bags of paddy inside the shop-cum-godown. He also detected daily sheets for purchase and sale of paddy on the Gaddi in a room facing to north. From the facts and circumstances stated above, it could be established that the accused/appellant was dealing with paddy business without any licence. The Police Officer arranged for measurement of loose stock of paddy of 84 quintals and the total quantity of paddy was 109.80, which was seized along with the scale and weights. The seizure list was prepared and duly signed by the witnesses. In the above circumstances, the accused had violated the provisions of paragraph 3(1)(a) of the West Bengal Rice and Paddy (Licensing and Control) Order, 1967. The accused was absconding at that time and subsequently, he surrendered before the Court. On the basis of the complaint lodged on 30th May, 1990, the above- mentioned case was initiated. After investigation police submitted charge-sheet against the accused under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act for violation of the provisions of paragraphs 3(1)(a) and 8A of the West Bengal Rice and Paddy (Licensing and Control) Order, 1967.
(3.) Mr. Mukti Chandra Ghosh, learned advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that P.W.1, P.W.2 and D.W.1 deposed in their depositions that the accused/appellant was a cultivator and had five brothers, who cultivated 20/22 bighas of land yielding double crops in a year and each bigha yields 15-16/20-22 mounds of rice. The accused was not carrying any business of paddy and the seized paddy was agricultural product of the accused and his brothers. They lived in a joint mess and the local people knew that the seized paddy was their agricultural product. As they were cultivators in that area, they maintained measurement scale, weight in their premises and the seized paddy was not actually weighed. The entire paddy was kept under the jimma of P.W.2, Debipada Pal.;