He number appeals by special leave granted by this Court.
Both the Magistrate and the Sessions Judge did number accept the evidence of the witnesses on the ground that they were interested in the appellant.
Oral evidence showed that he and, his brother were in possession of 80 90 bighas of land on which Paddy and other foodgrains found in his pos session, were grown, The case proceeded against him on the basis of the presump tion under para 3 of the Order.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated January 23, 1968 of the Patna High Court in Criminal Revision No.
The learned Sessions Judge did number accept this ground at least he did number say anything about it.
He held that such documents companyld be brought into existence at any time and were thus number reliable.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
91 of 1968.
40 of 1968.
The foodgrains found in his possession were also ordered to be forfeited to the State.
He was companyvicted by the Munsif Magistrate, First Class and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.
As Nagarmal did number possess a licence under the Bihar Foodgrains Dealers Licensing Order, 1966, he was prosecuted under s. 7 of the Essential Commodities Act for violation of cl.
P. Singh, D. N. Mishra and Govind Das, for the appel lant.
3 of the order.
C. Prasad, for the respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hidayatullah, C. J. On May 28, 1966, Bhola Prasad Mandal, Supply Inspector Pathargama with other officers searched a godown belonging to Nagarmal Tekriwal appellant and found stored therein 45 quintals of rice, 90 quintals of paddy, 5 50 quintals of grains, 3 quintals of wheat, one quintal Arhar and 207 quintals of Khesari together with weighing scale and weights and measures.
He appealed unsuccessfully to the Sessions Judge, Santhal Parganas, Dumka and his revision in the High Court was summarily dismissed.
