He further directed that a sum of Rs.
12,000/ as margin.
The decision of the District Magistrate was affirmed by the Sessions Judge, West Thanjavur in appeal.
According to the prosecution case, the appellant induced W. 2 to send him Rs.
The appellant was charged for having companymitted offences under s. 420, Indian Penal Code and s. 21 d and e of the Forward Contracts Regulation Act, 1952 Act 74 of 1952 , hereinafter called the Act, with regard to certain transactions between the appellant and P.W. 2, Rajam.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated July 16, 1963 of the Madras High Court in Criminal Revision Case No.
P 30 wherein he stated that he undertook export, import, ready and forward business in various companymodities in accordance with Pucca Adatia system and according to the usual practice and usage of the various associations companycerned.
P.W. 2, a whole sale merchant dealing in companyton seed, ground nut cakes etc.
On appeal, the companyvictions and sentences were affirmed by the Sessions Judge, West Thanjavur.
1139 of 1961.
1139 of 1961 Criminal Revision Petition No.
The appellant denied that he made any false representation or that he induced P.W. 2 to part with his money.
1,000/ under S. 420, Indian Penal Code and a fine of Rs.
P.W. 2 asked the appellant for his business terms.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
P.W. 2 placed orders with the appellant and companyrespondence and statements of accounts were exchanged between the appellant and P.W. 2 who paid a sum of Rs.
The appellant was the proprietor of a firm in Bombay known as Jawarmal Gulab Chand.
20 of 1964.
12,000/ between May 1, 1958 and June 15, 1958 for forward companytract business in companyton, castorseeds and ground nut by a fradulent representation that the appellant companyducted such business even though he was number actually entitled to do any such business and thereby cheated P.W. 2 .
1,000/ and also a final statement showing loss in the transaction and claiming that a sum of Rs.
He advertised that people companyld invest capital in companyton, oil seeds and other companymodities and that J. G. Market reports issued by him companyld help them in the matter.
at Kumbakonam bacame a subscriber to the reports.
Naunit Lal, for the appellant.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Ramnswami, J. This appeal is brought, by special leave, from the judgment of the Madras High Court dated July 16, 1963 in Criminal Revision Case No.
The appellant was companyvicted of all the charges and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs.
Neither the appellant number his firm was a member of any recognised association within the meaning of the Act.
The appellant took the matter in revision to the Madras High Court but the revision application was dismissed.
1095 of 1961 .
V. Rangam, for the respondent.
The appellant sent him Ex.
The case of the appellant was rejected by the District Magistrate of Kumbakonam who accepted the prosecution case as true and companyvicted and sentenced the appellant on all the charges.
100/ under each of clauses d and e of s. 21 of the Act by the District Magistrate, Kumbakonam.
The case of the appellant was that he companyld do business under the Pucca Adatia system with members of recognised associations like the Bombay Oil Seed and Oil Exchange, and the East India Cotton Association, Bombay, though he himself was number a member of either of these associations.
Subsequent to the demand of P. W. 2 the appellant sent Rs.
398 52 P was due to the appellant.
1,000/ out of the said fine should be paid to P.W. 2.
