CR.A/377/1991 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 377 of 1991 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= STATE OF GUJARAT - Appellant(s) Versus ROHITBHAI A SHAH - Opponent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MS DARSHANA PANDIT, APP for Appellant(s) : 1, NOTICE SERVED for Opponent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH Date : 24/07/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT Heard learned APP Ms.Darshana Pandit for the appellant-State. CR.A/377/1991 2/3 JUDGMENT 2. The appellant-State has preferred the present appeal against the judgment and order dated 16.3.1991 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, (“JMFC” for short), Padara, in Summary Case No.808 of 1991. By the said judgment and order, the learned Magistrate has convicted the respondent- accused and ordered him to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days T.R.C. and for the offence punishable under Section 37(1)(5) and imposed a further fine of Rs.200/-, and in default, to undergo 10 days simple imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 45 of the Weights and Measurement Act. No separate sentence has been imposed by the learned JMFC. 3. It may be noted that no specific sentence is prescribed for the alleged offence. Hence, taking into consideration the fact that this is a case in the nature of economic offence, the Court has imposed the sentence as aforesaid as thought it fit. The Court has taken into consideration the economic, social and financial background of the respondent – accused, and has awarded the aforesaid punishment. It is pertinent to note that it is the discretion of the Court to impose punishment in such matters. Therefore, there is no need to interfere with the judgment and order passed by the learned JMFC. Hence, this appeal is dismissed. (M.D.Shah, J.) CR.A/377/1991 3/3 JUDGMENT Sreeram.