Baharul Hossain vs The State Of West Bengal
2022 Latest Caselaw 6345 Cal

07.09. 2022
item No.01
n.b.
ct. no. 551
                          CRA 445 of 1989


                           Baharul Hossain
                                  Vs.
                       The State of West Bengal


                 Mr. Narayan Prasad Agarwal,
                 Mr. Pratick Bose,
                                   .....for the State.



                 None appears on behalf of the appellant.

                 State is represented through Mr. Narayan Prasad

        Agarwal along with Mr. Pratick Bose, learned advocates.

                 It is directed on the earlier occasion that the

        administrative notice upon the appellant has already been

        served but he did not appear.

                 This is an appeal pending since 1989. Considering

        the long pendency of the same, it is necessary to dispose of the

        same after hearing it on merit.

                 Matter is taken up for passing necessary order and

        judgment.

                 Mr.   Agarwal   and      Mr.   Bose,   learned   advocates

        appearing on behalf of the State submitted before this Court

        that the instant appeal has been preferred against the order of

        conviction under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of Essential Commodities

        Act, 1955. There are three accused persons before the learned
                                      2




Court below and after conclusion of hearing, the learned Court

below acquitted two accused persons and convicted the

present appellant.   They further contended that during the

course of trial 11 witnesses were examined on behalf of the to

prosecution and all witnesses supported the prosecution case.

They further argued that the matter has been categorically

examined by the learned Trial Court and there is no loopholes

in the impugned judgment.        They further argued that the

conduct of the appellant would show that he is not willing to

proceed with further and necessary order may be passed.

         Heard learned Counsel      and perused the impugned

judgment. It appears that the instant appeal has been

preferred against the order of conviction under Section 7(1),(a),

(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 as amended up to

date, for contravention of paragraph 4 and conditions no.4 and

5 of the license granted under Form B of the West Bengal

Kerosene Control Order, 1968, and sentence of regorous

imprisonment for 2(two) years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-

in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for 6(six)

months, as imposed on the appellant by the Learned Judge,

Special Court(E.C.Act) Midnapore, by his Judgment and Order

dated 26th September, 1989 passed in D.E.B. G.R. Case

no.47/88.

         I have carefully examined the impugned judgment, it

appears that on the basis of a written complaint dated

29.9.1988

the case was initiated by Kotwali Police Station,

District Midnapore(undivided). It has been alleged that the

accused persons had violated the provisions of para 4 of West

Bengal Kerosene Control Order 1968 and condition no.4/5 and

other provisions of licence of Kerosene oil dealer issued under

para 6 of the said order of 1968 and also para 3 of West Bengal

declaration of cost and prices of Essential Commodities Order

1977.

It further appears from the LCR that all the three

accused persons have been examined under Section 251

Cr.P.C and wherein all of them have been pleaded not guilty

and claim to be tried. The trial has initiated; during course of

trial; prosecution has produced eleven witnesses in their

favour after the completion of prosecution witnesses, all the

three accuses persons were examined under Section 313 of

Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the learned Trial Court below has

pronounced the Judgment. It appears that including the

eleven witnesses the P.W. 10 and P.W.l1 are the Investigating

Officers and others are the private witnesses. All the witnesses

have supported the prosecution case. Investigating Officer had

examined before the learned Court below regarding the

conduct of investigation. During the course of examination of

the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. they have enquired

regarding their complicity in the alleged offence but they

decided to be mum. They only pleaded innocence.

I have carefully examined the impugned judgment

after going through the entire judgment, it appears that the

learned Court below has pointed out each and every statement

of the prosecution witnesses; after scanning the evidence,

Learned Court below is of the optimum view that the case

against the two accused persons namely, Amir Hossain and

Lakshmi Kanta Dey had not been sufficiently proved and they

have been acquitted but in case the present appellant;

Learned Court below has opined that the offence against the

present appellant had sufficiently proved by the prosecution.

There were no iota of doubt against the commission of the

offence by the present appellant.

I have also carefully examined the evidence placed

before the Learned Court below. Considering the same, I am at

par with the view of the learned Court below and I find no

illegality or impropriety in the impugned judgment. So, there is

no scope to interfere with the finding of the learned Court

below. Accordingly, I find no merit in the present appeal and it

is liable to be dismissed. Hence the instant appeal is dismissed

on merit.

The impugned order passed by the learned Court

below is hereby affirmed.

The appellant/convict is not represented before this

Court. Thus, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Paschim Midnipur

is directed to issue warrant of arrest in the name of the present

appellant for his production to serve out the sentence.

Let a copy of this order be sent down to the Learned

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Paschim Midinipur through District

Judge, Paschim Midnipur for its proper compliance.

Thus, the instant appeal and connected application, if

any, is disposed of.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order

duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

( Subhendu Samanta, J.)