Delhi District Court
State vs Devi on 24 December, 2007
-Page numbers- FIR NO: 490/97
PS : Sultan Puri, Delhi
U/s 61 of Pb .Excise Act, 1914
IN THE COURT OF DR.SHAHABUDDIN METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE:COURT ROOM NO.105, ROHINI COURTS DELHI
State vs Devi
FIR No : 490/97
PS : Sultan Puri, Delhi
U/s 61 of Pb .Excise Act, 1914
JUDGMENT
A. SL. No. of the case :
B. Date of Institution in : 21.04.1998
the court
C. Date of commission of : 30.04.1997
offence
D. Name of the : HC Dayanand
complainant
E. Name of the accused , : Smt Devi W/o Sh. Surta
her parentage and R/o F-7/159, Jhuggi
residence Sultanpuri Delhi.
F. Offence complained of : U/s 61 of Punjab Excise
or proved Act, 1914
G. Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
H. Final Order : Acquitted
I. Date on which : 24.12.2007
judgment reserved
J. Date of such judgment : 24.12.2007
Contd....P/Next page
-Page numbers- FIR NO: 490/97
PS : Sultan Puri, Delhi
U/s 61 of Pb .Excise Act, 1914
K) BRIEF REASONS FOR THE DECISION OF THE CASE
1. The main prosecution case against the accused is that on 30.04.1997 at about 7.30 PM at Shani Bazar Road near F1 Block, Sultanpuri, Delhi, within the jurisdiction of PS Sultanpuri Delhi, the accused was found in possession of one blue bag containing 10 bottles of 750 ML each of country- made liquor without having any license / permit and in contravention of a Delhi Administration Notification in this regard. Hence, a chargesheet was filed against the accused after completion of entire investigation for the offence U/s 61 of Punjab Excise Act, 1914 (in short called as Punjab Ex. Act hereinafter).
2. Accused appeared in the court and she was supplied the copies of documents relied upon in the chargesheet as per mandate of section 207 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( in short called as Cr.P.C hereinafter).
3. On 29.01.99, a charge was framed against the accused for the offence U/s 61 of Punjab Ex.Act to which she did not plead guilty and claimed trial.
4. From the side of prosecution, PW1 HC Jagbir Singh, PW2 Sh D.K.Punj, PW3 HC Chand Singh and PW4 Ct Balwan Singh Contd....P/Next page
-Page numbers- FIR NO: 490/97 PS : Sultan Puri, Delhi U/s 61 of Pb .Excise Act, 1914 were examined and then remaining prosecution evidence (in short P/E) was closed.
5. On 12.07.2007, statement of accused was recorded U/s 313 Cr.P.C. in which she denied the allegations against her as false and incorrect but she did not want to lead defence evidence.
6. Final arguments were heard today on 24.12.2007 from Ld. APP for State and from accused in person.
7. The main submissions of Ld. APP for State were to the effect that on the basis of entire material on record, the case stands well proved against the accused for the offence U/s 61 of Punjab Excise Act beyond reasonable doubt and that she should be punished strictly as per law.
8. On the other hand, the main submissions of Ld. Defence counsel were to the effect that she was falsely implicated in this case; that nothing was recovered from her possession; that she was called in the police station on a false pretext and then this case was falsely planted upon her; that no independent and reliable person of the locality was joined by investigating officer (in short I/O) during investigation nor Contd....P/Next page
-Page numbers- FIR NO: 490/97 PS : Sultan Puri, Delhi U/s 61 of Pb .Excise Act, 1914 produced for evidence during trial of this case; that no recovery witness was produced for evidence by the prosecution side; that the case does not stand proved against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. On the basis of these grounds mainly, acquittal of the accused was prayed for.
9. I perused the entire judicial file minutely in view of the above mentioned rival submissions.
10. Before proceeding further on the merits of this case, I refer to the relevant provisions of section 61 of Punjab Excise Act for which the charge was framed against the accused in this matter.
11. The relevant portion of section 61 of Punjab Excise Act is to the following effect:-
"61.(1) Penalty for unlawful import, export, transport, manufacture, possession, etc. -- Whoever, in contravention of any section of this Act or of any rule, notification issued or given there-under or order made, or of any license, permit or pass granted under this Act.--
a) Imports, exports, transports, manufactures, collects or possesses any (intoxicant); or
b) constructs or works any distillery or brewery;
or
c) uses, keeps or has in his possession any materials, still, utensil, implement or apparatus Contd....P/Next page
-Page numbers- FIR NO: 490/97 PS : Sultan Puri, Delhi U/s 61 of Pb .Excise Act, 1914 whatsoever, for the purpose o manufacturing any (intoxicant) other than tari:
shall be punishable for every such offence with imprisonment for a term which may be extend to (three years) [ and with fine upto two thousand rupees and if found in possession of a working still for the manufacture of any (intoxicant) shall be punishable with the minimum sentence of six months imprisonment and fine of two hundred rupees]."
12. Now turning to the evidence of the record, all the witnesses examined in this case are only formal witnesses. PW1 is simply a formal witness as he was posted as duty officer at PS Sultanpuri Delhi on 30.04.97 and recorded FIR in this case of which copy is on record as Ex.PW1/A.
13. PW2 is also a formal witness as he was posted as Assistant Chemical Examiner at Excise Central Laboratory New Delhi on 03.11.97 and had given his expert opinion on the report in this case of which copy is on record as Ex.PW2/A.
14. PW3 is also a formal witness as he was posted as MHC(M) at PS Sultanpuri Delhi on 03.11.97 and case property of this matter was deposited with him and he had made entry of the same in Register No. 19 of which copy is on record as Ex.PW3/A.
15. PW4 is also a formal witness as he had simply deposited the Contd....P/Next page
-Page numbers- FIR NO: 490/97 PS : Sultan Puri, Delhi U/s 61 of Pb .Excise Act, 1914 case property of this matter in Excise Laboratory Delhi for chemical examination.
16. In view of the above mentioned discussion and on the basis of entire oral as well as documentary evidence on record, I am of the considered opinion that prosecution side has miserably failed to prove the essential ingredients of the offence u/s 61 of Punjab Excise Act against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, accused is entitled to be acquitted for this offence. Accordingly, accused Devi W/o Surta is hereby acquitted for the offence U/s 61 of Punjab Excise Act. Her bail bonds are discharged and her surety also discharged. Case property be destroyed / disposed of as per rules after expiry of period of appeal / revision, as the case may be. File be consigned to record room as per rules. ANNOUNCED AND DICTATED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON 24.12.2007 ( DR. SHAHABUDDIN ) METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE ROHINI COURTS DELHI Contd....P/Next page