Technical contravention in gold accountal found disproportionate, so non-renewal of the dealer's licence was unwarranted.

Non-accountal of gold ornaments was treated as a technical contravention, not a serious breach, where it was the first infraction, the ornaments were stated to be family ornaments already declared, and they had been polished through a certified goldsmith. The delay in making entries in the statutory accounts was not shown to be substantial. On those facts, cancellation or non-renewal of the gold dealers' licence was considered disproportionate to the breach, and renewal was therefore not justified.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants' admitted non-accountal of gold ornaments constituted a technical contravention or a serious breach so as to justify of renewal of the gold dealers licence under the governing provisions.

Analysis: Renewal of a gold dealers licence depended upon the nature of the contravention and the surrounding circumstances. The non-accountal was found to be the first infraction, involved ornaments stated to be family ornaments already declared and polished through a certified goldsmith, and the delay in entry into the statutory accounts was not shown to be of any significant duration. In such circumstances, the breach was treated as technical rather than serious, and cancellation or non-renewal was viewed as a punishment out of proportion to the offence.

Conclusion: The non-renewal of the gold dealers licence was not justified and the appeal was allowed.

---