Gurdev Singh, J. - (1.) THE short question of law which arises in this appeal relates to the construction of clause 3 (3) of the Punjab Khandsari and Gur Dealers Licensing Order, 1963. This question arises in this manner.
(2.) THE two respondents were convicted under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 1000/ - each or in default thereof rigorous imprisonment for six months by the order of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Batala. Along with them their father Hari Chand was also brought to trial on identical charges. The trial Court accorded him the benefit of the doubt and acquitted him. Aggrieved by the order of conviction, the respondents preferred an appeal before the Court of Session at Gurdaspur and the learned Additional Session Judge by his order dated the 8th May, 1968, accepted the same. This appeal by the State of Punjab is directed against the above -said order of acquittal. The facts are hardly in dispute. On receipt of information that some businessmen of the town of Batala were carrying on business in commodities like wheat, gur shakkar and rice without the requisite licence, the first information report was recorded by Sub -Inspector Harpal Singh on the 18th July, 1966, at the City Police Station Batala. A raid party was organised and Kartar Chand and Munshi Ram P.Ws were associated with the same. The premises of Shiv Shakti Rice Mills, Batala, were searched and Vidya Sagar respondent was found present there. During the raid. 1247 bigs containing 450 quintals and 150 kilograms of gur were duly taken into possession and attested by the public witnesses as well. The two respondents who admittedly are the partners of the said Mills could not produce any licence under the provisions of the Punjab Khandsari and Gur Dealer's Licensing Order, 1963, and further failed to produce any account books containing entries about the purchase or sale of the above -said commodity.
(3.) THE prosecution relied on 4 witnesses. P.W. 1 Kartar Chand was only tendered whilst P.W. 2 Assistant Sub -Inspector Pritam Singh and P.W. 3 Sub -Inspector Harpal Singh fully supported the prosecution version of the raid and the recovery of the commodities from the possession of the respondents. Amar Nath P.W. 4 District Food and Supplies Officer, Gurdaspur, categorically deposed that the two respondents neither in their individual capacity nor the firm in which they were partners held any licence under the Punjab Khandsari and Gur Dealer's Licencing Order, 1963. The respondents in their statements under section 342, Code of Criminal Procedure, admitted that they were partners of Messrs Hari Chand and Sons and also of Messrs Shiv Shakti Rice Mills, Batala. The factum of the recovery of the goods from their godown by the police was also admitted. It was further admitted that they did not hold the necessary licence under the provisions of the statute but it was stated that an application for securing the licence was made, but they were informed that the commission agents were not required to take any such licence. A further plea was taken that the commodity was held by them as commission agents on behalf of the various customers outside the state of Punjab. In defence, only two witnesses were produced. D.W. 1 Sowaram Chand, Clerk, Civil Supplies Office, Gurdaspur, merely stated that he could not depose as to how many firms at Batala had got licences under the Punjab Khandsari and Gur Licencing Order. In cross -examination he stated that Messrs Hari Chand and Sons applied for a licence on 23rd July, 1967. D.W. 2 Balak Ram, President of Pacca Arhti Association, Batala, deposed about the old age of Hari Chand, one of the partners of Messrs Hari Chand and Sons and the facts that he was not taking any active interest in the conduct of the family business. It deserves notice that after the framing of the charge on the 28th February, 1967, Vidya Sagar respondent had pleaded guilty to the charge though Parshotam Lal respondent did not do so. The learned trial Court has, however, in its judgment noticed and observed as follows: The accused then closed their defence without producing any evidence. Vidya Sagar and Parshotam Lal threw themselves at the mercy of the court and confessed their guilt.;