AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anjana Prakash, J.—The Appellants have been convicted u/s 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and whereas Appellant No. 1 has been sentenced to R.I. for nine months and Appellant No. 2 has been sentenced to R.I. for one year by the Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge under E.C. Act, Saharsa in Special case No. 36 of 1989 by a judgment dated 12.4.1995.
The case of the prosecution is that on 7.10.1989 when the stock registers of the shop of Appellant No. 2 was verified, many discrepancies were found.
The simple argument advanced on behalf of the Appellants is that it was a summary trial and, therefore, the evidence should have been recorded by the Judge, who had recorded the conviction, which was not the case here.
In such of such, the appeal is allowed and the order of conviction and sentence passed against the Appellants on 12.4.1995 by the Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge under E.C. Act, Saharsa in Special case No. 36 of 1989 is set aside. The Appellants are discharged from the liabilities of their bail bonds.