TMI Blog1965 (12) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a. The appellants were convicted under Section 120B of the Penal Code, read with Section 5 of Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947. The conviction was by the High Court after an acquittal by the Magistrate whose court was the court of first instance. 2.When this Court granted leave to the appellants to appeal, it limited such leave only to the question of sentence. When the appeal came up for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not treat it as such. Furthermore, that application had to be made to the learned Judge who granted special leave, and not to this Bench. Mr. Sen having considered the position abandoned that point also. 4.The only question that he argued in this appeal was the question of sentence to which the leave had been limited. It is quite clear, and this is conceded by Mr. S.G. Patwardhan, appearing for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entence of fine imposed by the High Court cannot be maintained. We, accordingly, reduce it to the maximum amount which the Magistrate could impose, that is to say, there will be a fine of Rs. 2,000/- on each of the appellants. 5.Mr. Patwardhan contended that in this case the appellants had made very large profits and that was the reason why the High Court had imposed a heavy fine. He said that a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wardhan's submission, we need not discuss this matter further. 6.The only order that we, therefore, pass in this appeal, is that the sentence of fine on the appellants is reduced to Rs. 2,000/- each. We are told by Mr. Sen that the appellants have already paid the fine which the High Court imposed on them. So, it is unnecessary to provide for a sentence of imprisonment in default of payment of f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
