- (1.)These revisions are filed by the Anakapalle Agricultural Market Committee, Anakapalli, against the acquittal of the accused by the 1st, Addl. Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam. The accused are licensees under the Andhra Pradesh (Agricultural Produce and Livestock) Markets Act, 1966. The Market Committee issued a notice to the accused calling upon them for production of accounts and records for assessment of the market fee under bye-law 44(5). The accused did not produce them inspite of repeated demands. Therefore, a complaint was filed against the accused for violating bye-law 44(5) of the Bye-Laws of the Agricultural Market Committee, Anakapalli. The learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam acquitted the accused on the ground that Bye-Laws framed by the Agricultural Market Committee have not come into force for they were not published in Telugu in Anahra Pradesh Gazette.
(2.)In these revisions it is submitted by Sri Reddi Panthulu, the learned counsel for the Market Comrnittee, that puhlication of the Bye-Laws ir Telugu in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette is rot mandatory but only directory and, therefore, the order of the learned Sessions Judge is not correct.
(3.)The complaint against the accused is that they have contravened Bye-Law 44(5) and, therefore, they are liable to be punished under Bye-Law 45,