JUDGMENT 1. - The accused petitioner was convicted by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirohi, under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short `the Act' hereinafter) read with Cl. 3 of the Rajasthan (Display of Prices of Essential Commodities) Order, 1966 (for short the Order hereafter) and was sentenced to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month. On appeal while conviction was maintained, the fine was reduced from Rs. 1,000/- to Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine, the accused petitioner was to suffer seven days further rigorous imprisonment- 2. The charge against the accused petitioner was that when his business, situated in Sarupganj were checked by the Enforcement Officer on July 9, 1975, it as noticed that the stock position of various articles was not displayed as required under clause 3. 3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that as the law then stood, it was not required of a dealer to also show the stock position and all that was required was that the price-list should have been displayed at a place as near to the entrance of the business premises as possible. It appears that clause 3 of the Order as it stood then, only required that a dealer should display, during the hours of business, in Form A, a list of prices of articles he deals in and was not required to also display the stock position of the various articles. It was only on 19.11.1975 that the Rajasthan (Display of Price and Stock of Essential Commodities) Order, 1975 came into force, clause 3 of which also required the display of the, stock position of various articles in the Schedule. The business premises of the accused were inspected on July 9, 1975, that is, much before 19.11.75. A learned single Judge of this Court in Laxminarain v. State of Rajasthan, Raj. Criminal Cases 1980 p. 189 has clearly held that it was not necessary then for a dealer to also display the stock position. That case applies on all fours in the present case. 4. The revision petition is allowed and the judgment of the lower appellate court is set aside. The accused is acquitted of the charge under S. 7 of the Act read with Cl. That case applies on all fours in the present case. 4. The revision petition is allowed and the judgment of the lower appellate court is set aside. The accused is acquitted of the charge under S. 7 of the Act read with Cl. 3 of the Order. He is on bail and need not surrender. Fine, if paid, shall be refunded. The confiscated goods shall be handed over to the accused on his application.Revision Allowed. *******