1. The appellants were convicted by the trial court under
Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and sentenced
to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay a
Digitally signedfineby of Rs.500/- each and in case of default, they were directed to MEENAKSHI KOHLI
undergo a further imprisonment for a period of 15 days. The
High Court upheld the conviction and sentence of fine. The
appellants have challenged the legality and correctness of the
said judgment in this appeal.
2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we do not find
any ground to interfere with the judgment of the High Court. At
this stage, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the
appellants are the first offenders. Therefore, the appellants may
be dealt with under Section 360 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1908. It is true that the appellants do not have
antecedents of offender. Both of them are the first offenders.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are
of the view that the appellants should have been dealt with under
Section 360 Cr.P.C. The ends of justice would be met by granting
the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 to the appellants.
We order accordingly. Hence, the appeal is allowed in part and
while upholding the conviction and sentence of fine awarded to
the appellants, sentence of imprisonment awarded against them
is set aside and the trial court is directed to deal with them under
the provisions of Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1908.
(S. ABDUL NAZEER) New Delhi; October 4, 2017.