Skip to content


Guman Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtRajasthan High Court
Decided On
Case NumberS.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 26/1976
Judge
Reported in1978WLN(UC)50
AppellantGuman Singh
RespondentThe State of Rajasthan
Cases ReferredState v. Gumansingh and Anr.
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code (new) - section 482 and rajasthan excise act, 1950--section 54(a)--liquor carried with valid permit--no criminal liability can be saddled--held, it is a fit case for interference.;it cannot be said that the petitioner was carrying the liquor without necessary permit. in the circumstances, no criminal liability can be saddled upon the petitioner merely because he was driving the truck. in fact it was ratan singh, an authorised employee of the licensee subhangani and party, who can be said to be in possession and transporting the liquor.;hence it is a fit ease for interference by this court at this stage.;application accepted - - unfortunately when ratan singh got down near mahamandir he failed to hand over that pass to the petitioner......may be stated as under; suhhaugani and party of jodhpur are the licence-holder for selling liquor. ratan singh is the authorised employee to act on behalf of the lincesee for taking delivery of liquor form the mandore distillary. he has been so recognized by the excise department. the present petitioner was an employee of one tulchiram, an owner of truck no. rsq 5363 and was working as driver of the truck. on behalf of subhangni and party, ratan singh took delivery of 6000 bottles of liquor from the government dostillary mander. this party engaged the truck of tulchiram on hire to transport that liquor, from mandor disilary to their godown at chandpol gate for rs. 125/-. the present petitioner took the truck for the purpose to mandor distillary; the necessary permit no. 10514/52 dated.....
Judgment:

R.L. Gupta, J.

1. The petitioner Guman Singh has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the proceedings rending against him in Criminal Original Case No. 1724/1975 under Section 54(a) of the Rajasthan Excise Act in the court of Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur.

2. The facts, in brief, giving rise to this petition may be stated as under; Suhhaugani and party of Jodhpur are the licence-holder for selling liquor. Ratan Singh is the authorised employee to act on behalf of the lincesee for taking delivery of liquor form the Mandore Distillary. He has been so recognized by the Excise Department. The present petitioner was an employee of one Tulchiram, an owner of Truck No. RSQ 5363 and was working as driver of the truck. On behalf of Subhangni and party, Ratan Singh took delivery of 6000 bottles of liquor from the Government Dostillary Mander. This party engaged the truck of Tulchiram on hire to transport that liquor, from Mandor Disilary to their Godown at Chandpol Gate for Rs. 125/-. The present petitioner took the truck for the purpose to Mandor Distillary; the necessary permit No. 10514/52 dated 28/1/1975 was issued by the Distillary Manager in favour of Ratan Singh for the same on 28/1/1975. These goods were being transported from Mandor Distillary to Chandpole in the truck No. RSQ 5363 driven by the petitioner. Ratan Singh was also in the truck in the beginning out when the truck reached near the Mahamandir, Raten Singh got down from the truck to go to his house for some urgent work. Unfortunately the relevant pass issued to him by he Distillary Authority remained with him & he forgot to hand it over to the present petitioner. When the truck reached neat the Paota Chawaraha, the Excise Authorities stopped the truck, arrested the petitioner and after necessary formalities, challaned the petitioner and the truck owner Tulchiram for the offence under Section 54(a) of the Rajasthan Excise Act, in the court of Judicial Magistrate No. 1 Jodhpur. This petition has been moved by the petitioner for quashing the proceedings pending against him on the ground that the allegation made in the complaint do not disclose any offence against him.

3. It would not be out of order to mention that the truck owner Tulchiram who was a co-accused in that complaint field a similar petition before this Court which was registered as S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 109/1977. Hon'ble Sharma, J. while accepting the petition filed by Tulchiram, quashed the proceedings pending against Tulchiram under Section 54(a) of the Rajasthan Excise Act, by the order dated December 9, 1977.

4. The petitioner is being proceeded with only because he was the driver of the truck in which 6000 bottles of liquor were found. It can not be said that petitioner was carrying these goods without the necessary permit. From the perusal of the record particularly from the statement of Shri S.V. Dhude, Asstt. Manager Government Distillary Mandore, Dhanraj L.D.C. Government Distillery Mandore, Shubhangani and Ratan Singh it is disclosed that there was a valid issue pass No. 10514/52 dated 28/1/1975 for taking this liquor from Mandore Distillary to Chandpole Gate in favour of Ratan Singh who was the authorized employee of the licinsee Shubhangani and party. Unfortunately when Ratan Singh got down near Mahamandir he failed to hand over that pass to the petitioner. However, in circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that the petitioner was carrying the liquor without necessary permit. In the circumstances, no criminal liability can be saddled upon the petitioner merely because he was driving the truck. In fact it was Ratan Singh, an authorized, employee of the licensee Subhangani and party, who can be said to be in possession and transporting the liquor. The learned Public Prosecutor has not disputed that a valid issue pass was issued by the Distillery for transporting these bottles of liquor from Mandore Distillary to Chandpole Gate. Hence it is a fit case for interference by this Court at this sage.

5. The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. field by the petitioner Gumanshingh is, therefore, accepted. The criminal proceedings going on Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur criminal case No. 1724/1975 State v. Gumansingh and Anr. are herby quashed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //