- (1.) This criminal revision petition has been filed under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. against the judgment and order dated 02.06.1995 passed by District & Sessions Judge, Hanumangarh (for short "the appellate court") in Criminal Appeal No.29/94 (35/88) whereby the learned appellate Court dismissed the appeal filed by the accused-petitioner and upheld the conviction and sentence of the accused-petitioner recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class No.1, Hanumangarh (for short "the trial court") vide judgment and order 04.07.1988 passed in Criminal Case No.279/79. By the said judgment, the learned trial Court convicted the accused-petitioner for offence under Section 28(2) of Rajasthan Krishi Upaj Vipnan Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act of 1961") and awarded sentence of one month simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.200/- and in default of payment of fine, further ordered to undergo 15 days additional simple imprisonment. The trial court further directed the accusedpetitioner to pay outstanding market fee of Rs.2746-16/- to the complainant Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Hanumangarh. The trial court further imposed late fee of Rs.27-46 per day on the aforesaid outstanding market fee payable from the date when the said amount became due till the filing of the complaint.
(2.) The facts of the case are that the complainant Secretary, Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Hanumangarh submitted a written complaint before the Court against the accused-petitioner and two other accused under Section 28(2) of the Act of 1961 on 03.08.1979 alleging that between 17.10.1978 to 19.06.1979 they sold rice to various persons and firms. Upon the said sale, market fee at the rate of 1% was become due upon the accusedpersons but despite notice the said market fee was not paid by them.
(3.) On the said complaint, the case was registered and the accused-persons were summoned. Thereafter, the learned trial court framed charge against accused-persons for offence under Section 28(2) the Act of 1961, they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. At the trial, the prosecution examined one witness in support of its case. In defence, one witness was examined and 351 documents were got exhibited. Thereafter the statements of the accused-persons were recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C. At the conclusion of the trial, the learned trial Court vide judgment and order dated 04.07.1988 convicted and sentenced the accused-petitioners for as aforesaid. Being aggrieved by their conviction and sentence, the accused-persons, including the petitioner, preferred appeal before the learned District & Sessions Judge, Hanumangarh, who by his judgment dated 02.06.1995 acquitted two accused-persons but upheld the conviction and sentence of the accused-petitioner recorded by the learned trial Court, as aforesaid. Hence, this revision. Mr. Shalendra Kala, appearing for the accusedpetitioner has submitted that judgments passed by the courts below are incorrect, improper and illegal and therefore the same deserve to be quashed and set aside. It is further submitted that the learned courts below did not consider the evidence of the accused-petitioner while passing the impugned judgments.;