TMI Blog1965 (3) TMI 79X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s different from that in a case like theft and that he contravened the provisions of the Act and the order made thereunder, it sentenced the appellant to rigorous imprisonment for one year and to a fine of ₹ 2,000 and in. default of payment of the fine he was to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Hence the appeal. 2. Mr. Pathak, learned counsel for the appellant, mainly contended that mens rea was a necessary ingredient of the offence under Section 7 of the Act, that as on the finding given by the learned Magistrate the appellant had no intention to contravene the provisions of the Act and the Order made thereunder, the High Court went wrong in setting aside the order of acquittal. 3. The material provisions of the Act and the Order made thereunder may be read at this stage: Section 7 of the Act. (1) If any person contravenes any order made under Section 3-- (a) he shall be punishable-- (ii) in the case of any other order, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine: The Madhya Pradesh Foodgrains Dealers Licensing Order, 1958: Section 2.--In this Order, unless the context otherwise requires,- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ication excluded mens rea. The mere fact that the object of the statute is to promote welfare activities or to eradicate a grave social evil is by itself not decisive of the question whether the element of guilty mind is excluded from the ingredients of an offence. Mens rea by necessary implication may be excluded from a statute only where it is absolutely clear that the implementation of the object of the statute would otherwise be defeated. The nature of the mens rea that would be implied in a statute creating an offence depends on the object of the Act and the provisions thereof: see Srinivas Mall v. King-Emperor, ILR 26 Pat 460: (AIR 1947 PC 135), Hariprasada Rao v. State, ; and Sarjoo Prasad v. State of Uttar Pradesh, . Most of the relevant English decisions on the subject were referred to in the judgment of this Court in State of Maharashtra v. Mayer Hans George, Cri Appeal No. 218 of 1963, dated 24-8-1964: . How to disprove mens rea has been succinctly stated in Halsbury's Laws of England, 3rd Edition, Col. 10, at p. 288, thus: When the existence of a particular intent or state of mind is a necessary ingredient of the offence, and prima facie proof of the existence o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he requisite licence fee. There was no intimation to him that his application was rejected. He was purchasing food-grains from time to time and sending returns to the Licensing Authority showing the grains purchased by him. He did not sell any grains purchased by him. On September 2, 1961, when the Inspector of Food and Civil Supplies, Dhar, checked the godowns of the appellant he had stored 885 maunds and 21/4 seers of wheat for sale. The said storage of the foodgrains for sale would be valid if he had a licence. The learned District Magistrate: found the said facts on the evidence adduced before him and the High Court did not take a different view on the said facts except that it made a remark that there was not a particle of evidence to show that he had sent the returns to the authority. Indeed the Magistrate said that the said fact was not disputed before him. We, therefore, for the purpose of this appeal ignore the remark made by the High Court. When the accused was questioned by the Magistrate he stated thus: I deposited the fee by challan for getting the licence for the year 1961. I submitted the application. I continued to submit the fortnightly returns of receipts and. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the general rule is that a crime is not committed unless the contravenor has mens rea. Normally full definition of every crime predicates a proposition expressly or by implication as to a state of mind: if the mental element of any conduct alleged to be a crime is absent in any given case, the crime so defined is not committed. 8. I have no doubt that an offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 10 of 1955 for breach of Section 3 of the Madhya Pradesh Foodgrains Dealers Licensing Order, 1958 necessarily involves a guilty mind as an ingredient of the offence. In terms, Section 3 of the Order, prohibits every person from carrying on business as a dealer except under and in accordance with the terms and conditions of a licence issued in that behalf by the Licensing authority. A dealer is defined by Section 2(a) of the Order as meaning a person engaged in the business of purchase, sale or storage for sale, of any one or more of the foodgrains in quantity of one hundred maunds or more at any one time whether on one's own account or in partnership or in association with any other person or as a commission agent or arhatiya, and whether or not in conjunction with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
