Conviction under Essential Commodities Act - Mens rea must be established

Calcutta High Court Acquits Truck Driver in Essential Commodities Act Case. Cviction Overturned Due to Lack of Evidence and Procedural Lapses in Seizure

In a significant judgment, the Calcutta High Court has overturned the conviction of Daibakinandan Ghosh, a truck driver, who was earlier found guilty under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The judgment, delivered by Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das, emphasized the failure of the prosecution to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt and highlighted procedural lapses in the seizure process.

The case originated on October 25, 1990, when police intercepted a truck carrying 25 bags of rice near the Bangladesh border. The driver, Daibakinandan Ghosh, along with other occupants, was accused of transporting the rice without a valid license. The Special Court in Malda convicted Ghosh and sentenced him to three months of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 250 on two counts.

However, the High Court found that the prosecution's case was fraught with inconsistencies. Notably, the independent witnesses were declared hostile, and the procedure under Section 100 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was not followed during the seizure. The court also noted that the evidence provided by the police officers was not corroborated by any independent verification, and the mens rea necessary for the offence was not established.

The judgment emphasized that for a conviction under the Essential Commodities Act, the prosecution must clearly demonstrate which specific order was violated and provide cogent evidence. In this case, the prosecution failed to do so, leading the High Court to set aside the conviction. The court's decision underscores the necessity of adhering to legal procedures and ensuring that evidence presented in court meets the requisite standard of proof.

Bottom Line:

Essential Commodities Act, 1955 - Conviction under Section 7 (1)(a)(ii) - Mens rea must be established for the offence - Prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt - Procedure under Section 100 Cr.P.C. not followed - Conviction against the appellant (driver of the truck) set aside.

Statutory provision(s): Essential Commodities Act, 1955 Section 7(1)(a)(ii), Section 100 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Daibakinandan Ghosh v. State of West Bengal, (Calcutta) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2805391