AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 204 wordsAnjana Prakash, J.—The Appellant has been convicted u/s 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and sentenced to R.I. for six months and a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of which further R.I. for one month 10.11.1995 by the Special Judge, E.C. Act, Saran at Chapra in G.R. case No. 526 of 1988 Trial No. 33 of 1995 by a judgment dated 10.11.1995.
The case of the prosecution is that when the shop of the Appellant was physically verified, some irregularities were found in maintenance of the books.
During trial the prosecution has examined only two witnesses on its behalf. Out of whom, P.W.1 is the informant himself, whereas the P.W.2 has been declared hostile.
In view of no independent corroboration of the case of the informant, I am not inclined to accept the prosecution case as having been established beyond all reasonable doubt.
In the result, the appeal is allowed and the order of conviction and sentence passed against the Appellant on 10.11.1995 by the Special Judge, E.C. Act, Saran at Chapra in G.R. case No. 526 of 1988 Trial No. 33 of 1995 is set aside. The Appellant is discharged from the liability of his bail bonds.