[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR J U D G M E N T S.B. CRIMINAL LEAVE TO APPEAL NO. 99/2008 STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. OM PRAKASH AGARWAL Date: 26.05.2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE Mr. Inderjeet Singh for the appellant. **** The present criminal leave to appeal under Section 378(5) Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment and order dated 18.04.2007 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Bansoor, District Alwar in Criminal Case No. 23/28/02, by which accused- respondent Om Prakash Agarwal has been acquitted from the offence under Section 17 read with Section 28 of the Rajasthan Agriculture Produce Markets Act, 1961 (For short 'the Act of 1961'). Brief facts of the case are that the Secretary, Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Khairthal filed a criminal complaint against the accused- respondent before the trial Court stating therein that on inspection of the record of the respondent firm, it was found that the accused-respondent has mentioned lesser quantity of the jeans which have been brought by them in the Mandi yard. It was further stated that the accused-respondent has evaded the Mandi fee of Rs. 21,455/- for the period from 31.04.99 to 31.03.2000. [2] The trial Court taken cognizance against the accused-respondent and thereafter framed charges under Section 17 and 28 of the Act of 1961. After completion of the trial, the trial Court i.e. Judicial Magistrate, Bansoor, District Alwar vide its impugned judgment dated 18.04.2007, acquitted the accused-respondent from the offence under Section 17 read with Section 28 of the Act of 1961. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment dated 18.04.2007, the present criminal leave to appeal has been filed by the Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Khairthal on the ground that the trial Court has erred in not considering the documentary evidence produced by the Department in support of their contentions. Further the trial Court also erred in not considering this aspect of the matter that all the three witnesses stated that they have found difference in the weight of the agriculture produces which has been mentioned in the sale receipt as well as in the gate pass and as such the respondent-firm has evaded the Mandi fee and accordingly it has been prayed that the present leave to appeal may be accepted and the appeal be treated as regular appeal and the order impugned dated 18.04.2007 passed by the trial Court be quashed and set-aside. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and carefully gone through the impugned judgment dated 18.04.2007 passed by the trial Court [3] and scanned the material available on the record. The trial Court while acquitting the accused-appellant from the offence under Section 17 read with Section 28 of the Act of 1961, has thoroughly considered the documents submitted by the appellant as also the statements of the witnesses and other evidence available on the record. With regard to witnesses PW1 Mahadev Prasad, PW2 Ashok Garg and PW3 Mohanlal, it has been admitted in their cross-examination that at the time of weighing agriculture produces, they were not present. It is also deposed by them that gate pass and weighing slip are used to be issued on the basis of the information furnished by the agriculturist as there is no facility of weighing the agriculture produces on the gate and at the time of issuing gate pass, weight is given on assumption and on the information furnished by the agriculturist and the same is not the exact weight of the agriculture produce and, therefore, there is every possibility of difference in weight of agriculture produce on the gate pass and sale receipt. The trial Court having considered each and every aspect and after carefully going through the documents and evidence produced, has observed that no offence under Section 17 read with Section 28 of the Act of 1961 is made out against the accused- [4] respondent and accordingly acquitted him from the aforesaid offence as the complainant appellant, the Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Khairthal has utterly failed to prove the aforesaid offence against the accused-respondent beyond doubt. In these circumstances, I do not find any merit or substance in the present criminal leave to appeal and the trial Court has rightly acquitted the accused-respondent from the offence under Section 17 read with Section 28 of the Rajasthan Agriculture Produce Markets Act, 1961 vide its impugned judgment dated 18.04.2007. In the result, the present criminal leave to appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed. (K.S. RATHORE),J. /KKC/