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 wordsGopal Prasad, J
Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant and learned Counsel for the State.
The Appellant has been convicted for offence u/s 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 500/-.
From perusal of the record it appears that order of conviction was recorded by the Presiding Officer on the evidence recorded by his predecessor. The case is under Essential Commodities Act which are summary proceeding u/s 12AA of Essential Commodities Act. In view of Section 326 of Code of Criminal Procedure the evidence of witness in summery proceeding are recorded in substance and hence, conviction on the basis of evidence recorded by predecessor is not maintainable and hence order of conviction and sentence recorded by the Presiding Officer, without recalling the witnesses is not sustainable. Hence order of conviction and sentence recorded by the lower court is hereby set aside.
It is pertinent to mention that 25 years has already been elapsed of the occurrence and hence re-trial is not required in the interest of justice and hence order of conviction and sentence recorded by the lower court is hereby set aside and the appeal is allowed.