CHAND GUPTA AND ORS. versus STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

Citation: [2009] 8 S.C.R. 285 · Decided: 08-05-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2009] 8 S.C.R. 285 
CHAND GUPTA AND ORS. 
v. 
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH 
(Criminal Appeal No. 202 of 2002) 
MAY 8, 2009 
[OR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM 
i 
SHARMA, JJ.) 
Punjab Excise Act, 1914 - s. 61 (1) (a) - Prosecution 
under~ For unlawful possession of liquor - Recovery in raid, 
of liquot in excess of the authorized quantity - Explanation 
bf the accused that the liquor was meant for transportation of 
a aonsignment- Conviction by courts below uls. 61 (1) (a) -
• 
Plea of accused thats. 61 (1) (a) not applicable and their act! 
omission was covered u/s. 65 (c) for omission to cancel their 
transport permit for a consignment - Held: Accused was 
liable to be convicted u/s. 61 (1) (a) - In view of nature of 
offence; not entitled to benefit under probation of Offenders 
Act - Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 - ss. 4 and 6. 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal 
No. 202 of 2002. 
~ 
I 
From the Judgment & Order dated 24.09.2001 of the High 
Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in Crl. Revision No. 19 
of 2000. 
U.U. Lalit, Manu Nair, Kirat Singh Nagra, Saanjh N. Purohit 
and Suresh A. Shroff & Co. for the Appellants. 
Naresh K. Sharma and Meenakshi Arora for the 
Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal is 
285 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
286 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2009] 8 S.C.R. 
A to the judgment of a learned Single Judge of Himachal Pradesh 
High Court upholding the conviction of the appellants for offence 
punishable under Section 61 (1 )(a) of the Punjab Excise Act, 
1914 (in short the 'Act') as applicable to the State of Punjab 
and the sentence of imprisonment for three years and a fine of 
B Rs.2,000/- with default stipulation. 
2. The Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Solan recorded the 
conviction as noted above and in appeal, learned Additional 
Sessions Judge, Solan confirmed the judgment and order of 
the trial Court. A revision petition was filed before the High Court 
C which dismissed the same by the impugned order. 
3. Background facts as noted by the High Court are as 
follows: 
0 
In the year 1992 accused Chand Gupta was the owner of 
M/s Shiva Enterprises, Solan dealing in L-2 and L-14 liquor 
business. Accused Kashmir Singh was the Salesman of the 
Firm, whereas accused Jagdish Chander was the supervisor 
looking after the godowns of the concern located at Solan. On 
6.6.1992 at about 1.00 p.m. Shri Harbhajan Singh, Deputy 
E Superintendent of Police, Enforcement, South Zone, Shimla 
alongwith Om Parkash Sharma, Excise and Taxation Officer 
(P.W.-1), Jagdish Raj Punj, Excise and Taxation Inspector 
[P.W.8), Mangat Ram, Sub Inspector [P.W.-9] and other police 
staff officials were on special checking when they received a 
F secret information that in the godowns of Mis Shiva Enterprises 
at Solan a large quantity of liquor was concealed without valid 
permit and pass. On the basis of the said information the 
godowns of Mis Shiv Enterprises were checked by the raiding 
party where accused Kashmir Singh, Salesman and accused 
G Jagdish Chander, Supervisor, were present. Accused Kashmir 
Singh handed over the keys of five godowns to the raiding party 
and on checking the godowns in the presence of both the 
. accused persons, large quantity of liquor was found concealed 
by the accused without permit, in excess of the quality of liquor 
H authorised by the competent authority under the permit. It was 
.. 
j 
t 
' 
-
CHAND GUPTA AND ORS. v. STATE OF HIMACHAL 287 
PRADESH [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.] 
also the case of the prosecution that on checking the sale and 
A 
stock register for the year 1992-93, 17 boxes of OM XXX Rum, 
21 boxes of Bison XXX Rum, 2 bottles and 7 boxes of half 
bottles and 17 boxes of Old Taren whisky along with 18 Nips 
were not entered in the register after 3.6.1997. Harbhajan Singh, 
Deputy Superintendent of Police, sent Ruqua Ext. PW-9/B to 
B 
the Station House Officer, Police Station, Enforcement, South 
! 
Zone, Shim la, on the basis of which F.1.R. Ex.PW-5/B came to 
be registered by Ram Rattan, Station House Officer. The 
investigation of the case was conducted by Shri Mangat Ram, 
Inspector Enforcement (PW-9) who took into possession the 
C 
seized bottles of liquor vide recovery memo Ext.. PW-3/A. 
Licence of the liquor vend Ext. PW-6/A was also taken into 
possession. He prepared site map Ext. PW-9/C. Statements 
of the witnesses were recorded by him and on receipt of the 
report of
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.