Allowed

Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee v. Chandrashekarappa

Karnataka HC4 Jan 2021CRL.A/1011/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Market licensees faced prosecution for unpaid cess and failure to produce accounts. The court upheld the Secretary's authority to prosecute, allowed all ten appeals, set aside the acquittals and directed payment of tax, fines and dues within 30 days, permitting statutory action on default.

What did the court decide?

All ten acquittals set aside; accused directed to pay tax, fines and dues within 30 days, with liberty to the complainant to take action under Section 132 on default.

Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee Vs… — GST and Indirect Tax | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

¶2

BEFORE

¶3

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1010/2017 C/W

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos.1008/2017, 1009/2017, 1011/2017, 1012/2017, 1013/2017, 1014/2017, 1015/2017, 1023/2017, 1110/2017

¶6

IN CRL.A.No.1010/2017

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE DAVANAGERE – 577 001. REP BY ITS SECRETARY B.ANAND.

¶9

...APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI CHAKRAVARTHY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI ANIL KUMAR J M, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

REVANASIDDAPPA S/O MALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS PROPRIETOR OF M/S SIDDANURU REVANASIDDAPPA & CO., APMC YARD, DAVANAGERE – 577 001. …RESPONDENT

¶13

¶14

(SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶15

THIS CRL.A. FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ACQUITTAL OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.10.2015 PASSED BY THE JMFC-II COURT, DAVANAGERE IN C.C.No.1410/2007-ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 114,115,117A OF KARNATAKA AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING (REGUATION) ACT.

¶16

IN CRL.A.No.1008/2017

¶17

BETWEEN:

¶18

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE DAVANAGERE -577 001 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY B ANAND.

¶19

...APPELLANT

¶20

(BY SRI CHAKRAVARTHY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI ANIL KUMAR J M, ADVOCATE)

¶21

AND:

¶22

N G VIJAYA S/O N G RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS PROPRIETOR OF M/S N G VIJAYA & CO., APMC YARD, DAVANAGERE – 577 001. …RESPONDENT

¶23

(SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶24

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ACQUITTAL OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.10.2015 PASSED BY THE JMFC-II COURT, DAVANAGERE IN C.C.No.1411/2007-ACQUITTING THE

¶25

¶26

RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 114,115,117A OF KARNATAKA AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING (REGUATION) ACT.

¶27

IN CRL.A.No.1009/2017

¶28

BETWEEN:

¶29

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE DAVANAGERE - 577 001. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY B ANAND

¶30

...APPELLANT

¶31

(BY SRI CHAKRAVARTHY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI ANIL KUMAR J M, ADVOCATE)

¶32

AND:

¶33

SHIVANANDAPPA S/O KOTTURU BASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS PROPRIETOR OF M/S S K PALLAGATTI & CO., APMC YARD DAVANAGERE - 577 001. …RESPONDENT

¶34

(SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶35

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 31.10.2015 PASSED BY THE J.M.F.C.(II COURT) DAVANAGERE IN C.C.No.1803/2009-ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 114, 115, 117A OF KARNATAKA AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING (REGUATION) ACT, 1956.

¶36

¶37

IN CRL.A.No.1011/2017

¶38

BETWEEN:

¶39

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE DAVANAGERE – 577 001. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY B ANAND.

¶40

...APPELLANT

¶41

(BY SRI CHAKRAVARTHY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI ANIL KUMAR J M, ADVOCATE)

¶42

AND:

¶43

CHANDRASHEKARAPPA S/O SIDDALINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS PROPRIETORE OF M/S.T H CHANDRASHEKHARAPPA & CO., APMC YARD DAVANAGERE - 577 001. …RESPONDENT

¶44

(SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶45

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF JUDGMENT DATED:31.10.2015 PASSED BY THE J.M.F.C.(II COURT), DAVANAGERE IN C.C.No.1409/2007 - CONVICTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 114, 115, 117A OF A.P.M.C. ACT.

¶46

IN CRL.A.No.1012/2017

¶47

BETWEEN:

¶48

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE

¶49

¶50

DAVANAGERE -577 001. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY B. ANAND.

¶51

...APPELLANT

¶52

(BY SRI CHAKRAVARTHY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI ANIL KUMAR J M, ADVOCATE)

¶53

AND:

¶54

MD. EZAZ S/O IQBAL AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS PROPRIETOR OF M/S. K IQBAL & CO., APMC YARD, DAVANAGERE -577 001. …RESPONDENT

¶55

(SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶56

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ACUITTAL OF THE JUDGMENT DATED:31.10.2015 PASSED BY THE J.M.F.C - II COURT, DAVANAGERE IN C.C.No.1407/2007 – ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 114, 115, 117A OF KARNATAKA AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING (REGUATION) ACT.

¶57

IN CRL.A.No.1013/2017

¶58

BETWEEN:

¶59

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE DAVANAGERE -577 001. REP BY ITS SECRETARY B ANAND.

¶60

...APPELLANT

¶61

(BY SRI CHAKRAVARTHY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI ANIL KUMAR J M, ADVOCATE)

¶62

¶63

AND:

¶64

BASAPPA S/O SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS PROPRIETOR OF M/S REVANASIDDESWARA TRADERS APMC YARD DAVANAGERE – 577 001. …RESPONDENT

¶65

(SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶66

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ACUITTAL OF THE JUDGMENT DATED:31.10.2015 PASSED BY THE J.M.F.C - II COURT, DAVANAGERE IN C.C.No.1408/2007 – ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 114, 115, 117A OF KARNATAKA AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING (REGUATION) ACT.

¶67

IN CRL.A.No.1014/2017

¶68

BETWEEN:

¶69

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE DAVANAGERE -577 001. REP BY ITS SECRETARY B ANAND. (BY SRI CHAKRAVARTHY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI ANIL KUMAR J M, ADVOCATE)

¶70

...APPELLANT

¶71

AND:

¶72

MANJUNATH S/O BASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS PROPRIETOR OF

¶73

¶74

M/S DARSHAN TRADERS, APMC YARD, DAVANAGERE – 577 001. …RESPONDENT

¶75

(SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶76

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER AND JUDGMENT DATED:31.10.2015 PASSED BY THE J.M.F.C – (II COURT), DAVANAGERE IN C.C.No.1406/2007 – ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 114, 115, 117A OF APMC ACT.

¶77

IN CRL.A.No.1015/2017

¶78

BETWEEN:

¶79

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE DAVANAGERE – 577 001. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY B ANAND. ...APPELLANT

¶80

(BY SRI CHAKRAVARTHY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI ANIL KUMAR J M, ADVOCATE)

¶81

AND:

¶82

N G VIJAY S/O N G RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS PROPRIETOR OF M/S N G VIJAY & CO., APMC YARD, DAVANAGERE – 577 001. …RESPONDENT

¶83

(SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶84

¶85

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER AND JUDGMENT DATED:31.10.2015 PASSED BY THE J.M.F.C – (II COURT), DAVANAGERE IN C.C.No.1804/2009 – ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 114, 115, 117A OF APMC ACT.

¶86

IN CRL.A.No.1023/2017

¶87

BETWEEN:

¶88

AGRICULTURAL PROCUDE MARKETING COMMITTEE DAVANAGERE – 577 001. REP BY ITS SECRETARY, B.ANAND.

¶89

...APPELLANT

¶90

(BY SRI CHAKRAVARTHY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI ANIL KUMAR J M, ADVOCATE)

¶91

AND:

¶92

K J ABRAR S/O K JAVID, 36 YEARS, PROPRIETOR OF M/S K J ABRAR & CO., APMC YARD, DAVANAGERE – 577 001. …RESPONDENT

¶93

(SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶94

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER AND JUDGMENT DATED:31.10.2015 PASSED BY THE J.M.F.C – (II COURT), DAVANAGERE IN C.C.No.1412/2007 – ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 114, 115, 117A OF APMC ACT.

¶95

¶96

IN CRL.A.No.1110/2017

¶97

BETWEEN:

¶98

AGRICULTURAL PROCUDE MARKETING COMMITTEE DAVANAGERE – 577 001. REP BY ITS SECRETARY B ANAND. (BY SRI CHAKRAVARTHY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI ANIL KUMAR J M, ADVOCATE)

¶99

...APPELLANT

¶100

AND:

¶101

SRI. VIJAYAKUMAR S/O BASAVANNAPPA 50 YEARS, PROPRIETOR OF M/S HAMPALLI TRADERS APMC YARD DAVANAGERE – 577 001. …RESPONDENT

¶102

(SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶103

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ACQUITTAL OF THE JUDGMENT DATED:31.10.2015 PASSED BY THE J.M.F.C – II COURT, DAVANAGERE IN C.C.No.1802/2009 – ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 114, 115, 117A OF KARNATAKA AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING (REGULATION) ACT.

¶104

THESE CRIMINAL APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶105

¶106

JUDGMENT

¶107

These ten appeals are directed against the judgment and order passed by the trial court wherein

¶108

the accused in respective cases were acquitted. The

¶109

details are as under:

¶110

SL. NO.	CRL.A. NO.	C.C.NO. & NAME OF THE ACCUSED	RESULT & DATE OF DISPOSAL
1.	1010/2017	1410/2007 REVANA- SIDDAPPA	ACQUITTED 31.10.2015
2.	1008/2017	1411/2007 N.G.VIJAYA	ACQUITTED 31.10.2015
3.	1009/2017	1803/2009 SHIVANANDAPPA	ACQUITTED 31.10.2015
4.	1011/2017	1409/2007 CHANDRA- SHEKARAPPA	ACQUITTED 31.10.2015
5.	1012/2017	1407/2007 MOHAMMED EZAZ	ACQUITTED 31.10.2015
6.	1013/2017	1408/2007 BASAPPA	ACQUITTED 31.10.2015
7.	1014/2017	1406/2007 MANJUNATH	ACQUITTED 31.10.2015
8.	1015/2017	1804/2009 N.G.VIJAY	ACQUITTED 31.10.2015
9.	1023/2017	1412/2007 K.J.ABRAR	ACQUITTED 31.10.2015
10.	1110/2017	1802/2009 VIJAYAKUMAR	ACQUITTED 31.10.2015

¶111

¶112

In all the ten cases, the complainant is the Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee,

¶113

Davanagere and it is the appellant in all these appeals and represented by R.M.Patil, Secretary.

¶114

The cases pertain to non- payment of cess/taxes as per the notices. Thus, the complainant which is body relating to agricultural produce marketing committee has to perform its official duty of collecting the taxes/cess as the case may be. It is clear by this time that the accused/respondents have not paid the duty/cess/tax who are running their business of all kinds of agricultural products and they are transporting agricultural products outside State without paying market cess as contemplated under the APMC Regulation Act. The APMC on verification of the accounts extract produced by the accused has levied cess and 30 days time was given for payment. This order was challenged before the Director-

¶115

¶116

Agriculture Produce Marketing Department, Bangalore and the Committee constituted has confirmed the assessment made by the APMC, Davanagere and fixed the market cess. Inspite of it, accused did not pay the amount and such notice was issued. Even though notices were served no response were shown by the accused. Accused have been alleged for the offences punishable under Sections 114, 115, 117A of APMC Act.

¶117

Thereby instituted criminal cases against accused. The accused persons who are the respondents herein did not appear before the complainant to make the payment of taxes or cess as stated above.

¶118

In order to avoid confusion, the details of notice/assessment order/ amount payable by each of the accused are shown in the following table.

¶119

¶120

Sl. No.	Date of Assessment order	Amount/tax/ Duty & fine	C.C.NO. & Name of the accused	Crl.A.No.
1.	18.05.2004	CESS- Rs.1,66,759/- FINE Rs.50,028/-	1410/2007 REVANA- SIDDAPPA	1010/2017
2.	18.05.2004	CESS- Rs.4,40,138/- FINE Rs.1,32,041/-	1411/2007 N.G.VIJAYA	1008/2017
3.	18.05.2004	CESS- Rs.4,21,623/- FINE Rs.1,40,541/-	1803/2009 SHIVANAN- DAPPA	1009/2017
4.	18.05.2004	CESS- Rs.2,42,010/- FINE Rs.72,873/-	1409/2007 CHANDRA- SHEKARAPPA	1011/2017
5.	18.05.2004	CESS- Rs.95,256/- FINE Rs.28,577/-	1407/2007 MOHAMMED EZAZ	1012/2017
6.	18.05.2004	CESS- Rs.76,102/- FINE Rs.28,831/-	1408/2007 BASAPPA	1013/2017
7.	18.05.2004	CESS- Rs.66,970/- FINE Rs.20,091/-	1406/2007 MANJUNATH	1014/2017
8.	18.05.2004	CESS- Rs.1,75,980/- FINE Rs.58,660/-	1804/2009 N.G.VIJAY	1015/2017
9.	18.05.2004	CESS- Rs.1,46,734/- FINE	1412/2007 K.J.ABRAR	1023/2017

¶121

¶122

		Rs.40,020/-
10.	18.05.2004	CESS- Rs.2,19,993/- FINE Rs.73,331/-	1802/2009 VIJAYAKUMAR	1110/2017

¶123

On the basis of the complaint trial court registered criminal case against accused and issued summons. Accused appeared through their counsel, their plea was recorded, they pleaded not guilty and

¶124

claim to be tried.

¶125

Upon conclusion of the trial, trial court on the basis of the oral and documentary evidence produced by the parties in respective cases acquitted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 114, 115, 117A of APMC Act. Being aggrieved by the

¶126

same the complainant has presented these appeals.

¶127

Learned counsel Sri.Chakravarthi for Sri Anil

¶128

Kumar for appellant in all the appeals would submit that being a trader member, accused/respondents are

¶129

¶130

liable to pay the taxes on the goods purchased or sold by them. Learned counsel would further submit that the default was obvious, reminder notices were given, but there was no sign of payment by the accused/respondents. They have taken up false defences, such as no business being conducted by them, sellers have already paid the cess, in which event the respondents are not liable to pay. Further it is also contended that trade had not happened with the approval of APMC.

¶131

Respondents/accused in all the appeals are served and unrepresented.

¶132

Since all the ten cases are similar in nature as they are pertaining to fine/taxes to be payable by the accused/respondents to the complainant, which is a body under Government i.e. agricultural produce

¶133

¶134

marketing committee they are taken up together for disposal.

¶135

Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee was established with an object to bring better regulation of buying and selling the agricultural produce and

¶136

establishment of markets. All the accused/respondents are the members of the complainant-committee represented by its Secretary.

¶137

The complaints were presented by the Secretary APMC, Davanagere under Section 200 Cr.P.C. for the offences punishable under Sections 114, 115, 117(A) of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1956.

¶138

The learned trial Judge observed that PW1R.M.Patil is the Secretary of APMC and the order passed by him is without authority. He also observed that reliance on the suggestion that the present

¶139

¶140

Secretary is having no power to prosecute the case and the accused have furnished the details. He relies on the vouchers which are marked as different numbers in each of the cases. It is also stated that receipts were produced and they were considered by the learned trial Judge.

¶141

The focal point of observation is that, there is no document to show that the complainant has authorization to file a criminal case and dues and liability are established and so there is no way of accused persons committing the offence and accordingly they were found not guilty and came to be acquitted.

¶142

The liability of a member runs on the basis of the licence which they obtained to trade the goods which includes buying and selling, commission agent and other aspects and totally on the basis of their licence.

¶143

¶144

On the sum of sale or purchase in terms of goods they are bound to pay taxes. The business happens in APMC yard with agricultural grower goes and sells the goods with the license holders. In other words the accused persons who were all accommodated there even by means of a shop or premises. The member who receives the goods in the said fashion immediately will have a contract or may get the contract to sell the produce/goods. In this way produce enters APMC through the intervention of member which is sold or purchased and the amount received by the members, cess has to be payable.

¶145

In other words, the liability is on the members to pay tax/cess. The default to pay the tax or evasion or suppression of transaction they attract criminal liability. Because the persons who commits a crime when prosecuted does not pay the amount he is liable

¶146

¶147

for punishment under Section 115 of AMPC Act. The power of Magistrate to recover summarily fee or other amount is mentioned in Section 116.

¶148

Section 8 of the Act deals with controller of

¶149

marketing by agricultural produce which is as under:

¶150

“(1) After [1] [the market is established] ,-

¶151

(a) no local authority shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force establish, authorise or continue or allow to be established, authorised or continued any place in the market area for the marketing of any notified agricultural produce:

¶152

Provided that a local authority may establish or continue any place for retail sale of any notified agricultural produce [2][other than cattle, sheep and goats] subject to the condition that no market functionary shall operate in such place except in accordance with the provisions of this Act, and the rules and the bye laws and standing orders of the market committee;

¶153

(b) no person shall, without, or otherwise than in conformity with the terms and conditions of, a licence granted by the market committee in this behalf,-

¶154

(i) use any place in the market area for the marketing of the notified agricultural produce, or

¶155

¶156

(ii) operate in the market area or in any market therein as a trader, commission agent, broker, processor, weighman, warehouseman, or in any other capacity in relation to the marketing of the notified agricultural produce:

¶157

Provided that nothing contained in clause (b) shall apply,-

¶158

(i) to the sale of such agricultural produce if the producer of such produce is himself its seller, or

¶159

1[(ii) to the purchase of such produce if the purchaser is a person who purchases such produce for his domestic consumption;]:-

¶160

2[(2)No place except the market yard, market sub-yard, [5] [sub-market yard, private market yard or farmer - consumer market yard] as the case may be, shall be used for purchase or sale of notified agricultural produce.

¶161

(3) Nothing in sub-section (2) shall apply to,-

¶162

(a) the purchase or sale of notified agricultural produce by,-

¶163

(i) a Taluk Agricultural Produce Co-operative Marketing Society;

¶164

(ii) a Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society; and

¶165

(iii) any other co-operative society permitted by the state Government;

¶166

(b) the sale of notified agricultural produce by a retail trader.]

¶167

¶168

4[(c) a sale by a Contract farming producer to a contract forming sponsor under Contract farming agreement;

¶169

(d) a direct purchase of notified agricultural produce by a licencee under section 72A from the agriculturist.]

¶170

The rules and regulation made by the APMC Act

¶171

are binding on the member. In this connection, the total liability in the form of cess/tax/fees as the case may be.

¶172

Accused were served with notice in each of the cases and prosecution was also started against them.

¶173

The examination details and filing of the documents in

¶174

each of the cases are shown separately as follows:

¶175

“CRL.A. No.1010/2017:

¶176

List of witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:-

P.W.1:RM Patil

For the accused:

D.W.1 Revanasiddappa

III. List of exhibits marked on behalf of the prosecution:-

¶182

ExP1 Resolution of APMC ExP2 Notice ExP3 Show cause notice ExP4 Postal acknowledgment ExP5 Demand order ExP6 Notice regarding appeal ExP7 Postal Acknowledgement ExP8 Notice ExP9 Postal Acknowledgement ExP10 Legal Notice ExP11 Postal Acknowledgment ExP12 Order copy of Additional Director APMC ExP13 Railway Master statement.”

¶183

For the accused: ExD1 to 13 Receipts ExD1 a Receipts Book.”

¶184

CRL.A No.1008/2017

¶185

List of witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:-

P.W.1: RM Patil

For the accused:

D.W.1 N.G.Vijaya

List of exhibits marked on behalf of the prosecution:-

¶190

¶191

ExP1 Resolution of APMC ExP2 Notice ExP3 Show cause notice ExP4 Postal acknowledgment ExP5 Demand order ExP6 Notice regarding appeal ExP7 Postal Acknowledgement ExP8 Notice ExP9 Postal Acknowledgement ExP10 Legal Notice ExP11 Order copy of Additional Director APMC ExP12 Railway Master statement.”

¶192

For the accused:

¶193

ExD1 to 23 Receipts ExD1a Receipt Book.”

¶194

CRL.A No.1009/2017

¶195

List of witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:-

¶196

P.W.1:Puttaswamy

¶197

For the accused: Nil

¶198

List of exhibits marked on behalf of the prosecution:-

¶199

ExP1 Letter given to Accused ExP2 Letter issued by the accused ExP3 Letter given to Accused ExP4 Letter issued by the accused ExP5 Letter issued by the accused ExP6 Order copy of Additional Director APMC.

¶200

¶201

CRL.A No.1011/2017

¶202

List of witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:-

¶203

P.W.1: RM Patil

¶204

For the accused:

¶205

D.W.1 Chandrashekharappa

¶206

List of exhibits marked on behalf of the prosecution:-

¶207

¶208

For the accused:

¶209

ExD1 to 9 Receipts ExD10 to 13 Receipts Books.”

¶210

¶211

CRL.A No.1012/2017

¶212

List of witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:-

P.W.1: RM Patil

For the accused:

D.W.1 Ejaj Ahmed

List of exhibits marked on behalf of the prosecution:-

¶217

ExP1 Resolution of APMC ExP2 Notice ExP3 Show cause notice ExP4 Postal acknowledgment ExP5 Demand order ExP5a Signature ExP6 Order copy of Additional Director APMC ExP7 Notice ExP8 Postal Acknowledgement ExP9 Show cause notice ExP10 Postal Acknowledgement ExP11 Notice ExP12 Postal Acknowledgement

¶218

For the accused:

¶219

ExD1 to 19 Receipts ExD1a Receipt Book.”

¶220

¶221

CRL.A No.1013/2017

¶222

List of witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:-

¶223

P.W.1: RM Patil For the accused: D.W.1 Basappa. List of exhibits marked on behalf of the prosecution:-

¶224

¶225

For the accused:

¶226

ExD1 to 4 Receipts ExD1a Receipt Book.”

¶227

CRL.A No.1014/2017

¶228

List of witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:-

P.W.1: RM Patil

For the accused:

D.W.1 Manjunath

List of exhibits marked on behalf of the prosecution:-

¶234

ExP1 Resolution of APMC ExP2 Notice ExP3 Show cause notice ExP4 Postal acknowledgment ExP5 Demand order ExP6 Notice regarding appeal ExP7 Postal Acknowledgement ExP8 Notice ExP9 Postal Acknowledgement ExP10 Legal Notice ExP11 Order copy of Additional Director APMC ExP12 Railway Master statement.”

¶235

For the accused:

¶236

ExD1 to 10 Receipts ExD1a Receipt Book.”

¶237

CRL.A No.1015/2017

¶238

List of witnesses examined on behalf of the complainant:-

P.W.1:Puttaswamy

For the accused: NIL

List of exhibits marked on behalf of the complainant:-

¶243

ExP1 Notice ExP2 Letter given by the accused ExP3 Notice ExP4 Letter given by the accused ExP5 Order copy of Additional Director APMC

¶244

For the accused: -NIL-

¶245

CRL.A No.1023/2017

¶246

List of witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:-

P.W.1: RM Patil

For the accused:

D.W.1 K.J.Abrar

List of exhibits marked on behalf of the prosecution:-

APMC

ExP13 Railway Master statement.”

¶255

For the accused:

¶256

ExD1 to 14 Receipts ExD15 to 22 Receipts Books.”

¶257

CRL.A No.1110/2017

¶258

List of witnesses examined on behalf of the complainant:-

¶259

P.W.1:Puttaswamy

¶260

For the accused: D.W.1 Shivanandappa.

¶261

List of exhibits marked on behalf of the complainant:-

¶262

ExP1& 2 Letter given to Accused ExP3 Postal Acknowledgement ExP4 Notice ExP5 Document received from Spice Co. Ex.P6 Order copy of Additional Director APMC

¶263

For the accused:

¶264

ExD1 Licence Certificate”

¶265

The learned counsel for appellant submitted that

¶266

in each of the cases, the assessment orders have

¶267

¶268

considered, the amount if any paid by the members and the order regarding the payment of tax and fine with reference to assessment order is as stated above.

¶269

The payment of tax basically was resisted on two grounds as submitted by learned counsel for appellant:

¶270

They have not entered into any trading that

¶271

make them liable to pay taxes/cess/penalty;

¶272

The secretary is not qualified and competent to prosecute the cases.

¶273

It was also submitted that each of the accused/respondents challenged the order of assessment before the Director of APMC and it was the remarks of the Director that they should produce the books of account which they have not complied. When the director ordered the members for

¶274

production of books of accounts they failed to do so.

¶275

¶276

It is also contended that, non production of

¶277

Books of accounts also amounts to an offence punishable under Section 117(A) of the Act.

¶278

It is seen from the order sheet that learned counsel for the appellant present. Learned counsel for respondents absent and there is no representation. None of the respondents present. Considering their continuous absence apart from the notice being served on them, further dictation is continued.

¶279

The grievance of the appellant APMC is that accused being licence holders trading in the premises of APMC, they are members, they sought permission and licence was issued to them. They are liable to pay the taxes and submit books of accounts.

¶280

¶281

Section 72 of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act, 1966 provides for grant of licences for carrying on business in different capacities. For clarity and understanding, Section 72 of the said Act is extracted as under:

¶282

“72. Grant of licences.- (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act and the rules made in this behalf, a market committee may [on an application made by any person in such form as may be prescribed and] after making such inquiries as it deems fit, grant or renew a licence for the use of any place in the market area for the sale of the notified agricultural produce or for operating therein as a [x x x x x], commission agent, broker, processor, weighman, measurer, surveyor, ware houseman or any other market functionary in relation to the marketing of agricultural produce; or may, after recording its reasons in writing therefor, refuse to grant or renew any such licence.

¶283

(2) Licences may be granted under subsection (1), in such forms, for such periods, on such terms and conditions and restrictions (including provision for prohibiting brokers and commission agents from acting in any transaction both as buyer or seller, or on behalf of both the buyer and seller; and also provision for prohibiting brokers from acting in any transaction, [x x x x1 for prescribing the qualifications and disqualifications of licensees,

¶284

¶285

the circumstances in which licences may be refused, suspended or cancelled and prescribing the manner in which and the places at which auctions of agricultural produce shall be conducted and the delivery of agricultural produce shall be made in any market or market area) and on payment of fees not being in excess of such maxima, as may be prescribed.

¶286

(3) The market committee or its Chairman, if so authorised by the committee, may grant a temporary licence for a period of not more than one month to any [x x x x x ] not ordinarily resident in the market area to operate in the market yard or sub-yard on payment of such fee as may be fixed by the market committee subject to the condition that he shall not purchase any agricultural produce except by payment of the price in cash.

¶287

[(4) The Director of Agricultural Marketing or the Officer authorized by him may grant a trader license in such manner and in such form as may be prescribed to operate as trader in any of Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee yards/private markets in the State. The existing licensee shall obtain a fresh trader licence within a period of six months from the date of commencement of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) (Second Amendment) Act, 2013.]”

¶288

¶289

The licence so issued is subject to cancellation

¶290

and suspension for the ground contemplated under Section 73 of the Act, which reads as under:

¶291

“73. Power to cancel or suspend licences.- (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (4), a market committee may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, suspend or cancel a licence,-

¶292

(a) if the licence has been obtained through wilful misrepresentation or fraud;

¶293

(b) if the holder thereof or any servant or any one acting on his behalf with his express or implied permission, commits a breach of any of the terms or conditions of the licence;

¶294

(c) if the holder of the licence in combination with other holders of licences commits any act or abstains from carrying out his normal business in the market with the intention of wilfully obstructing, suspending or stopping the marketing of agricultural produce in the market area, in consequence whereof the marketing of any produce has been obstructed, suspended or stopped;

¶295

(d) if the holder of the licence has become an insolvent ;

¶296

¶297

[(dd) if the holder of the licence fails to pay the market fee due along with the penalty specified in the byelaws];

¶298

[(de) if the holder of licence fails to pay the price to the producer-seller immediately after sale];

¶299

(e) if the holder of the licence incurs any disqualification as may be prescribed; or

¶300

(f) if the holder is convicted of any offence under this Act.

¶301

(2)(a) Subject to the provisions of subsection (4), the Chairman of a market committee may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, suspend a licence for a period of not more than one month for any reason for which a market committee may suspend a licence under sub-section(1).

¶302

(b) Subject to the provisions of subsection (4), the Secretary of a market committee may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, suspend a licence for a period of not more than one week for any reason for which a market

¶303

¶304

committee may suspend a licence under sub-section(1).

¶305

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), but subject to the provisions of sub-section (4), the [Director of Agricultural Marketing] may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, by order suspend or cancel any licence granted or renewed under this Chapter:

¶306

Provided that no order under this subsection shall be made without notice to the market committee [or any other person likely to be affected, as the case may be].

¶307

(4) No licence shall be suspended or cancelled under this section, unless the holder thereof has been given a reasonable opportunity to show cause against such suspension or cancellation.”

¶308

In these cases, it is non payment of tax as stated above, as the Act provides for penal provisions under Sections 114, 115 and 117(A) of the Act. The criminal cases were filed under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. However, there is no bar for filing a criminal case by virtue of Sections 114 and 115 of the Act. Section 74 of the Act provides for appeal, which reads as under:-

¶309

¶310

“74. Appeal.- (1) Any person aggrieved by an order.-

¶311

(a) of the market committee refusing to grant or renew a licence, or cancelling a licence, or suspending any licence may, within thirty days from the date on which the order is communicated to him, appeal to the [Director of Agricultural Marketing];

¶312

(b) of the Chairman [x x x x x ] suspending any licence may, within seven days from the date on which the order is communicated to him, appeal to the market committee;

¶313

[(bb) of the Secretary suspending any licence may, within seven days from the date on which the order is communicated to him, appeal to the Chairman];

¶314

(c) of the [Director of Agricultural Marketing] cancelling or suspending a licence may, within thirty days from the date on which the order is communicated to him, appeal to the [State Government];

¶315

[(d) of the [Director of Agricultural Marketing] under sections 9 and 61, may, within sixty days from the date on which the order is communicated to him, appeal to the [State Government]].

¶316

[(1A) Any appeal under sub-section (1) pending before the Government, or the market committee as against the order of the Secretary shall, on the date of commencement of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) and Certain Other Laws

¶317

¶318

(Amendment) Act, 1991 stand transferred respectively to the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal and the Chairman and such appeal shall be decided by it or him as if it had been filed before it or him];

¶319

[(1-B) Any appeal under sub-section (1) pending before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal on the date of commencement of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) (Amendment) Act, 2009 shall stand transferred to the State Government and such appeal shall be decided by it as if such appeal had been filed before it;]

¶320

(2) The [Director of Agricultural Marketing], the market committee, [the [State Government] [or the Chairman]], as the case may be, shall, on such appeal, make such order as he or it deems just and proper.”

¶321

It was informed that accused persons in each of the case preferred appeal before the competent authority i.e., the Director of Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee and those appeals were rejected and accused persons were directed to furnish the books of accounts which are marked as different exhibits in each of the case.

¶322

¶323

I have already stated that Section 114 of the Act provides for penalty for evasion of fee etc. The said relevant provision is already stated above, which

¶324

reads as under:

¶325

“114. Penalties for evasion of payment of fee, etc .- [Whoever] evades the payment of any fee, or other amount due from him under this Act or the rules, or the regulations or byelaws, shall, on conviction, be punished with fine [which shall be a sum equal to [three times the amount of fee or other amount due or three thousand rupees whichever is more]] and in the case of a continuing evasion with a further fine which may extend to [two hundred] rupees for every day during which the evasion is continued after conviction therefor.”

¶326

Section 115 of the Act provides for liability of the

¶327

accused to pay fee, cess or other amount, which reads

¶328

as under:

¶329

“[115. Liability of accused to pay fee, cess or other amount.- Any person prosecuted for an offence under section 114 shall not be absolved from his obligation to pay to the market committee the fee or other amount due from him under this Act or the rules or the regulations or the bye-laws.].”

¶330

¶331

Now in so far as filing of Criminal Case is concerned, Section 116 of the Act provides for power

¶332

of Magistrate to recover summarily the fee or other amount, Section 116 of the Act reads as under:

¶333

“116. Power of Magistrate to recover summarily fee, or other amount.- Whenever any person is convicted of an offence under this Act or the rules or the regulations or bye-laws made thereunder, the Magistrate shall, in addition to any fine which may be imposed, recover summarily and pay over to the market committee, or the Board, as the case may be, the amount of fee or other amount due from him under this Act or the rules or the regulations or bye-laws and may, in his discretion, also recover summarily and pay over to the market committee or to the Board such amount, if any, as he may fix as the costs of the prosecution.”

¶334

Section 8 of the Act deals with control of marketing agricultural produce which includes

¶335

maintenance of accounts by the licencees. Violation of Section 8 of the Act is penal in nature and penalty

¶336

is provided under Section 117 of the Act, which reads

¶337

as under:

¶338

¶339

”117. Penalty for contravention of section 8.- Whoever in contravention of the provisions of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 8 uses any place in the market area for marketing any agricultural produce, or operates as a trader, commission agent, broker, processor, warehouseman or in any other capacity, without a valid licence [or whoever in contravention of the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 8 uses any place for purchase or sale of notified agricultural produce] shall on conviction, be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months and [with fine which may extend to rupees five thousand but shall not be less than rupees five hundred] and in the case of a continuing contravention with a further fine which may extend to [two hundred rupees per day] during which the contravention is continued after the first conviction.

¶340

[117A. Penalty for contravention of section 66.- If any person carrying on business in notified agricultural produce, fails without any reasonable cause.-

¶341

(i) to produce or caused to be produced accounts and documents; or

¶342

(ii) to furnish or caused to be furnished information, which he is required to produce or as the case may be,

¶343

¶344

to furnish, under section 66, he shall, on conviction, be punishable with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees].

¶345

[117-B. Penalty for contravention of Section 75.-(1) If any person carrying on business in agricultural produce in the market yard, private market, spot exchange or farmers-consumer market fails to pay the price to the seller the price without any reasonable cause shall on conviction be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months and with fine which may extend to twice the value of the price and in the case of continuing contravention with a further fine which may extend to rupees one thousand per day during which the contravention is continued after the first conviction.

¶346

(2) Any person prosecuted under subsection (1) shall not be absolved from his obligation of payment of price to the seller or any other amount due from him under this Act, rule, bye-laws or regulations.]

¶347

Section 122 provides for general provisions for punishment of offences in case where the penalty is not provided for commission of offence. The accused persons failed to produce the books of accounts. However, on verification and scrutiny of the records from competent corners, the total assessment were

¶348

¶349

cess or tax and fine amount payable by the accused

¶350

persons as exhibited in each of the cases are as

¶351

under:

¶352

CESS-Rs.1,66,759/- CESS-Rs.4,40,138/-	FINE Rs.50,028/- FINE Rs.1,32,041/-
CESS-Rs.4,21,623/-	FINE Rs.1,40,541/-
CESS-Rs.2,42,010/-	FINE Rs.72,873/-
CESS-Rs.95,256/-	FINE Rs.28,577/-
CESS-Rs.76,102/-	FINE Rs.28,831/-
CESS-Rs.66,970/-	FINE Rs.20,091/-
CESS-Rs.1,75,980/-	FINE Rs.58,660/-
CESS-Rs.1,46,734/-	FINE Rs.40,020/-
CESS-Rs.2,19,993/-	FINE Rs.73,331/-

¶353

Learned counsel for appellant would submit that reselling of the delivery of goods for the purpose of trading through the premises of APMC by the licensees were ascertained through the conclusive authority i.e. from Railways. Moreover, the goods delivered as the receipt of the goods and disposal of the same is inter State i.e. for other States and transactions are not within the State. The statement of the Railway Master is marked in each of the cases which is reflected in

¶354

¶355

paragraph 15 above except in Crl.A.No.1110/2017, Crl.A.No.1009/2017 and Crl.A.No.1015/2017. The

¶356

charge made against each of the accused is for the offence punishable under Sections 114, 115 and 117 (A) of the Act. In so far as Section 114 of the Act is concerned, this is penalty for evasion of payment of fee as stated above and in so far as Section 115 is concerned, it deals with liability of the accused to pay fee, cess or other amount as stated above and Section 117(A) is with reference to non production of books of accounts books. At this stage, it is necessary to mention about Section 78 of the Act which deals with Commission Agent’s Commission and responsibility and the penalty for contravention of Section 75 of the Act is provided in the said two sections which are as under:

¶357

[75. Payment of price.-(1) Subject to such deductions, if any, as are authorised to be deducted according to this Act or the rules or

¶358

¶359

the bye-laws or under any other law for the time being in force, by way of.-

¶360

(i) fees;

¶361

(ii) market charges;

¶362

(iii) taxes; and

¶363

(iv) the advances, if any, on the goods made and evidenced by authentic vouchers with interest which shall not be more than the rates charged by the Scheduled Banks if any, due thereon;

¶364

the price of the goods sold in the market yard and outside the market or the sub-market in the market area shall be paid to the seller by the buyer in cash or cheque, immediately after the sale except in a case where a commission agent, agrees in writing, in the form prescribed by the bye-laws, to give delivery to the buyer on credit of a term which shall in no case exceed the maximum period of credit prescribed by the bye-laws, if any.

¶365

(2) In case buyer does not make payment under sub-section (1), he shall be liable to make additional payment at the rate of one per cent per day of the total price of the notified agricultural produce payable to the seller within five days.

¶366

(3) In case buyer does not make payment with additional payment to the seller under sub-sections (1) and (2) above, within five days from the day of such purchase his licence or registration, as the case may be, shall be deemed to have been cancelled on the sixth day and he shall not be registered or granted any licence or permitted to operate in

¶367

¶368

any market area within the State under this Act for a period of one year from the date of such cancellation.]”

¶369

Section 78 is as under:

¶370

“78. Commission agent's commission and responsibility.

¶371

(1) A commission agent shall recover his commission only from the buyer at such rates not exceeding two percent of the price, for which the agricultural produce is sold as may be specified in the bye-laws:

¶372

Provided that in the case of agricultural produce like fruits, vegetables and flowers, a commission agent may charge commission at such rates not exceeding five percent of the price for which such agricultural produce is sold as may be specified in the bye-laws.

¶373

(2) A commission Agent shall,-

¶374

(a) arrange for the storage of the goods of the seller;

¶375

(b) keep the goods of the seller in safe custody and adequately insured against fire, theft or flood, rain or any other natural calamites; and

¶376

(c) in the case of credit sale of notified agricultural produce belonging to the seller remit immediately after the sale, the price of such produce to the market committee along with authentic document irrespective of whether he has or h as not received the price of the produce from the buyer.

¶377

¶378

(3) A commission agent shall receive through the Market Committee his commission and such other amount as are authorized to be deducted on the basis of authentic documents.”

¶379

Similarly penalty for failure to obey order under Section 123 is punishable under Section 119.

¶380

However, the charge in all the cases are provided.

¶381

Now the question is whether the accused persons in all the cases committed default in paying cess or tax or the fee whatever the name they are called. Basically they have not furnished the books of accounts despite demand notice and they have not availed opportunity. Further the only concept that would indicate the liability for paying the tax, cess or other dues is the extent of business and quantum of trade activities which are not even furnished by the accused in all the cases. The next aspect is the complainant had to struggle to place the fact of

¶382

¶383

receipt of delivery of goods from the seller dispatching to the buyer lately. This also required a serious exercise which complainant had to make. However complainant succeeded in eight case except Crl.A.No.1110/2017 and Crl.A.No.1015/2017 in getting them. However the offence stand committed by the remaining as well. The competent authority for administration of market for agricultural produce is the complainant under the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing Regulation Act, 1956.

¶384

The accused/respondents run proprietary concerns they are the license holders in different capacities and they are duty bound to comply with the rules and regulations prescribed by the complainant for trading, maintenance of books of account, furnish the same to the complainant and to pay whatever the cess or tax as the case may be.

¶385

¶386

Notices were issued followed by show cause

¶387

notice and demand letter. The formalities of opportunity including demand notice, show cause notice everything was exhausted but the accused persons turned deaf ears. It is not forthcoming as to how the trial Judge tried the matters separately instead of clubbing as they are common. The main defence of the accused persons in almost all the cases are (1) they have not received the delivery of goods for trading under the control of complainant and they have not done such business. (2) The seller has already paid cess or tax to the complainant. 3) The secretary who is the complainant has no authority to initiate legal proceedings or file complaint. In view of the same complaint has to fail.

¶388

Incidentally the learned trial court accepts all the three defences and reasoning he mentions that the Secretary is not the competent authority and there

¶389

¶390

are no documents to show that the goods were

¶391

received and the seller had paid the tax.

¶392

In this connection regarding the first defence that they had not received the delivery of goods or trading it by dispatching to the buyer. The said statement is in Kannada it reflects regarding delivery and business done through the accused persons. Insofar as next defence is concerned their defence is seller has paid it but the business conducted and transport of the goods is concerned it is not intrastate.

¶393

On the other hand interstate business. In this connection it is necessary to mention Section 65(2-A)

¶394

of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act, 1966 which is as under:

¶395

65(2-A) – The market fee payable under this section shall be realized as follows namely-

¶396

(i) if the produce is sold through a commission agent, the commission agent (shall) realize

¶397

¶398

the market fee from the purchaser and shall be liable to pay the same to the committee;

¶399

(ia) if the produce is sold by an importer to the purchaser, the importer shall realize the market fee from the purchaser and shall be liable to pay the same to the committee;

¶400

(ii) if the produce is purchased directly by a trader from a producer, the trader shall be liable to pay the market fee to the committee;

¶401

(iii) if the produce is purchased by a trader from another trader, the trader selling the produce (shall) realize it from the purchaser and shall be liable to pay the market fee to the committee; and

¶402

(iv) in any other case of sale of such produce, the purchaser shall be liable to pay the market fee to the committee.

¶403

Receiving delivery or selling the property as the license holder in different capacity would be definitely available if the business is conducted in a honest and genuine manner. The accused person never allowed to have access to the books of account by the complainant. Per contra the complainant was driven from pillar to post to collect the details from the only

¶404

¶405

available source that is railways which is the means of transport of goods ordered by the license holdersaccused persons. Insofar as filing of complaint is concerned the legal proceedings questioned by the accused is that complainant committee or secretary of the committee cannot initiate proceedings and cannot file complaint. In this connection it is necessary to mention the power and duties of the Secretary, APMC under Section 56 which is as under:

¶406

“56. Powers, functions and duties of the Secretary – Subject to the powers of the Chairman under Section 46 and the other provisions of this Act or the rules, the Secretary shall be the chief executive officer [and the custodian of all the records and properties] of the market committee, and shall exercise and perform the following powers and duties, in addition to such other duties as may be specified in this Act, the rules or bye-laws, namely:-

¶407

(i) convene [in consultation with the Chairman] the meetings of the

¶408

market committee and of the sub-committees, if any, and maintain the minutes of the proceedings thereof;

¶409

¶410

(ii) attend the meeting of the market committee and of every sub-committee and take part in the discussion but shall not move any resolution or vote at any such meeting;

¶411

(iii) take action to give effect to the resolutions of the committee and of the sub-committees, and report about all actions taken in pursuance of such resolutions, to the committee, as soon as possible;

¶412

(iv) furnish to the market committee such returns, statements, estimates, statistics and reports as the market committee may from time to time require including reports,- (a) regarding the fines and penalties levied on, and any disciplinary action taken against the members of the staff and the market functionaries and others; (b) regarding over-trading by traders; (c) regarding contraventions of the Act, the rules, the bye-laws or the standing orders by any person; (d) regarding the suspension or cancellation of licences [by him or by the Chairman] or the [Director of Agricultural Marketing]; (e) regarding the administration of the market committee and the regulation of the marketing;

¶413

(v) produce before the committee such documents, books, registers and the like as may be necessary for the transaction of the business of the committee or the sub-committees, and also whenever called upon by the market committee to do so;

¶414

(vi) exercise supervision and control over the acts of all officers servants of the committee;

¶415

¶416

(vii) collect fees and other moneys leviable by or due to the market committee;

¶417

(viii) be responsible for all moneys credited to or received on behalf of the market committee;

¶418

(ix) make disbursements of all moneys lawfully payable by the market committee;

¶419

(x) report to the Chairman and the Director of Agricultural Marketing 1[immediately in respect of fraud, illegal acts] 2. embezzlement, theft or loss of market committee funds or property;

¶420

(xi) prefer complaints in respect of prosecutions to be launched on behalf of the market committee and conduct proceedings, civil or criminal, on behalf of the market committee.”

¶421

In this connection Section 56(11) in its clear words authorize the Secretary in respect of prosecution to be launched on behalf of the Marketing Committee and concrete the proceedings on behalf of the Marketing Committee. Section 57 also supports Section 56(11) and the said provision is as under:

¶422

“57. Acts of market committee, etc., not to be invalidated.-No act of a market committee, or of any sub-committee thereof, or of any persons acting as a member, Chairman, ViceChairman, presiding authority or Secretary shall be deemed to be invalid by reason only of

¶423

¶424

some defect in the constitution or appointment of such market committee, sub-committee, members, Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Presiding authority or Secretary or on the ground that they, or any of them, were disqualified for such office, or that formal notice of the intention to hold a meeting of the committee or of the subcommittee was not given duly or by reason of such act having been done during the period of any vacancy in the office of the Chairman, Vice- Chairman, or Secretary or member of such committee or sub-committee or for any other informality not affecting the merits of the case.”

¶425

In the over all circumstances of the case, the learned trial Judge seriously erred in reading legal provisions of APMC Act and failed to go through the documents and focus importance on the crucial documents and mentions the documents with reference to superficial layers without going into them and it has resulted in miscarriage of justice.

¶426

Punishment provided for the same which means fine amount payable by them is three times the amount of fine or other amount recoverable whichever

¶427

¶428

is more. The respondents have not challenged or participated in the proceedings nor placed appearance and going through legal provisions both substantial and procedural, I find the accused persons in each of the cases are liable to pay. Thus, the amount payable

¶429

as penalty as per Section 114 is as under:

¶430

AMOUNT	PENALTY	CRL.A.NO.
CESS-Rs.1,66,759/- FINE -Rs.50,028/-	THREE TIMES FINE Rs.50,028 X3= Rs.1,50,084/-	1010/2017
CESS-Rs.4,40,138/- FINE-Rs.1,32,041/-	THREE TIMES FINE Rs.1,32,041 X3= Rs.3,96,123/-	1008/2017
CESS-Rs.4,21,623/- FINE-Rs.1,40,541/-	THREE TIMES FINE Rs.1,40,541 X3= Rs.4,21,623/-	1009/2017
CESS-Rs.2,42,010/- FINE-Rs.72,873/-	THREE TIMES FINE Rs.72,873 X3= Rs.2,18,619/-	1011/2017
CESS-Rs.95,256/- FINE -Rs.28,577/-	THREE TIMES FINE Rs.28,577 X3= Rs.85,731/-	1012/2017
CESS-Rs.76,102/- FINE-Rs.28,831/-	THREE TIMES FINE Rs.28,831 X3= Rs.86,493/-	1013/2017
CESS-Rs.66,970/-	THREE TIMES	1014/2017

¶431

¶432

FINE-Rs.20,091/-	FINE Rs.20,091 X3= Rs.60,273/-
CESS-Rs.1,75,980/- FINE- Rs.58,660/-	THREE TIMES FINE Rs.58,660 X3= Rs.1,75,980/-	1015/2017
CESS-Rs.1,46,734/- FINE-Rs.40,020/-	THREE TIMES FINE Rs.40,020 X3= Rs.1,20,060/-	1023/2017
CESS-Rs.2,19,993/- FINE- Rs.73,331/-	THREE TIMES FINE Rs.73,331 X3= Rs.2,19,993/-	1110/2017

¶433

The Judgment of acquittal passed in all the ten criminal cases by the learned trial Judge is perverse, illogical and are liable to be set aside. Accordingly I proceed to pass the following:

¶434

ORDER

¶435

Appeals are hereby allowed. Judgment and order dated 31.10.2015 passed in C.C.Nos.1410/2007, 1411/2007, 1803/2009, 1409/2007, 1407/2007, 1408/2007, 1406/2007,

¶436

1804/2009, 1412/2007 and 1802/2009 are set aside.

¶437

¶438

The accused persons are directed to pay fine amount and tax amount and pay dues to the complainant as stated above within 30 days, failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to take legal action as per Section 132 of APMC Act.

¶439

Sd/JUDGE

¶440

tsn*/CHS/SBN

Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee v. Chandrashekarappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee v. Chandrashekarappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Karnataka Vs Sri. Shivegowda

A. Ashok Kumar Vs v. Venkatesha

Sri Muniswamy Naidu S/O Pitchaka Venkataramaiah Vs Sri Venkataramappa, Since Dead by Lrs, Smt.Channamma

R Rangaswamy Since Dead by Lrs Gowramma Vs Veerabhadraiah S/O Dasappa Since Dead by Lrs

Sri Nadagowda Vs Smt.Annapoorna

Agricultural Procude Marketing Committee Vs K J Abrar