Krishna Datt Shah vs The State Of M.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 9561 MP

                                           1




    IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                              AT J A B A L P U R
                                       BEFORE
        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL

                     CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1738 of 2000

BETWEEN:-
KRISHNA DATT SHAH, S/O BHOLANATH SHAH, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
OCCUPATION - SALESMAN R/O VILLAGE - KACHNI BALOHAN TOLA, P.S.
BAIDHAN, DISTRICT SIDHI (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                                       .....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI ANIRUDDH PRASAD SHAH - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                                     .....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI PRADEEP GUPTA - GOVT. ADVOCATE)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Reserved on             : 22.06.2023
               Pronounced on           : 26.6.2023
       This petition having been heard and reserved for judgment, coming

on for pronouncement this day, the Court delivered the following:-

                                     JUDGMENT

This appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short "Cr.P.C.") against the impugned judgment dated 6.7.2000 passed by the Special Judge, Sidhi, in Special Case No.31/99, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 3 read with Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short "EC Act") and sentenced to 6 months R.I. with fine of Rs.1,000/- with

default stipulation of one month's R.I.

2. Brief facts of the case are that appellant was working as Salesman in Fair Price Shop. On 21.7.1998 Assistant Food Officer Arjun Singh Gurjar (P.W.4) conducted inspection on his shop. On enquiry, it was found that the appellant had black marketed sugar and made forged entries in distribution register and not opened the Fair Price Shop at the scheduled time. The appellant has violated Clause 7, 19 (a) & (c) of the "Madhya Pradesh (Khadya Padarth) Sarvajanik Nagrik Purti Scheme, 1991".

3. After completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was filed in the Court of Special Judge, Sidhi. The learned trial Court after analyzing the evidence, convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned hereinabove.

4. The appellant has preferred present appeal on several grounds but during the course of argument, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant did not press this appeal on merit. He did not assail the finding part of the judgment. He has confined his arguments on the quantum of sentence only. His only prayer is that imprisonment of 6 months be reduced to the period already undergone by him as the appellant is facing trial since 1999. During the trial as well as during pendency of this appeal he has been regular in appearing before the Courts and has complied with all the orders. It is also submitted that appellant is a poor Salesman having no criminal past and no criminal case prior or after this incident has been registered against him, therefore, the jail sentence may be removed or reduced.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the prayer and prays for dismissal of this criminal appeal by submitting that the trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record and impugned orders.

7. So far as the quantum of sentence is concerned, the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant appears to be just and proper. The coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Kanhaiya Lal Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2019 SCC OnLine MP 267 has held as under:-

"15. On going through Section 7(1)(a)(i) it appears that if the person is found to be guilty under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 then the maximum punishment of one year and fine to be awarded while under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) the sentence has to be awarded up to seven years but not less than three months and fine is also liable to be imposed. In the case in hand the offence is of very simple in nature and appellant is facing the mental agony of trial of this case since long 22 years. Thus, considering all these circumstances by adopting the lenient view, I deem it fit to extend the benefit of proviso of Section 7(1)(a)(ii) under which minimum sentence of imprisonment for a term of three months can be relaxed and person concerned may be awarded sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than three months."

8. In the present case age of the appellant is also 56 years and he is facing trial since last 24 years i.e. 1999, therefore, relying upon the judgment of the coordinate bench of this Court in the case of Kanhaiyalal (supra), it would be appropriate to reduce the sentence to the period already undergone by him. In this case, appellant has already undergone jail sentence for a period of more than four month and seven days i.e. 31.12.1998 to 5.1.1999 and 27.2.2023 to 26.2.2023.

9. Therefore, by affirming the conviction of the appellant under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, this appeal is partly allowed and the jail sentence awarded for a period of 6 months R.I. is reduced to the period already undergone by him by enhancing the amount of fine from Rs.1,000/- to Rs.5,000/-. The appellant is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of Rs. 5,000/- in the trial court within 30 days from receipt of certified copy of this judgment. On failure to deposit the enhanced fine amount, the appellant has to suffer further two month's rigorous imprisonment. To this extent the impugned judgment is hereby modified.

10. Registry/ trial Court is directed to prepare supersession warrant and to send it to the Jail Superintendent, Sidhi orj concerned jail to release the appellant in this case then and there, if he is not warranted in any other case.

11. Appeal is disposed of accordingly.

12. Trial Court record along with a copy of appeal judgment be sent down to the Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, Sidhi for compliance.

(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL) JUDGE

mrs.mishra

DEEPA Digitally signed by DEEPA MISHRA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, ou=JUDICIAL, postalCode=482001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=3ece46b8e3ea2cc1fa35126c71ddf298e10aae dd7345a5efb4e2a1a8a88446bf,

MISHRA pseudonym=EDBA3C23FD7AA0D583DA5AD3755C3F 37152C1CC0, serialNumber=E5AB7E7C0015E02D05F4525962F1C48 3E415D288FB5C7C2082F662F2BB495B44, cn=DEEPA MISHRA Date: 2023.06.27 14:52:57 +05'30'