JUDGEMENT Anjana Prakash, J. 1. The Appellant has been convicted under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act for violation of the provisions of Clause 18 of the Unification Order by the Special Judge, Gaya in G.R. No. 15/93, T.R. No. 62/94 by the judgment dated 7.9.1995 and sentenced to a period of 9 months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default of which further rigorous imprisonment for 3 months. 2. The prosecution case is that on 24.9.1993 when he along with the Supply Inspector searched the shop of the Appellant, he found his wife P.W. 2 present there but there was no display board showing the stock position. 3. The prosecution in all examined 7 witnesses out of whom P.W. 1 is the supply inspector, P.W. 2 is the wife of the Appellant, P.W. 3 is here say witness, P.W. 4 is the neighbouring witness but does not say anything regarding seizure where as P.W. 5 is hostile, P.W. 6 is also merely on the point of recovery of articles from the shop of the Appellant whereas P.W. 7 is a formal witness. 4. From the analysis of the evidence it appears neither the informant nor the Investigating Officer has been examined and, therefore, it is difficult to sustain the conviction of the Appellant for violation of any clause of unification order. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the order of conviction and sentence passed against the Appellant by the Special Judge, Gaya in G.R. No. 15/93, T.R. No. 62/94 by the judgment dated 7.9.1995 is hereby set aside and he is acquitted of the charges. The Appellant is discharged from the liabilities of his bail bonds.