JUDGMENT Misra, J. - This is an application in revision against an appellate order of the learned Sessions; Judge of Hardoi upholding the conviction of and the sentence passed on Krishna Kumar applicant by an Honorary Special Magistrate, First Class, Hardoi, u/s 155 of the U. P. Municipalities Act and rule 144 of the Municipal Account Code. 2. The facts are that on 13th May, 1944, Krishna Kumar brought two cart loads of cloth containing four bales to Hardoi through the Municipal Octroi barrier situate on Bilgram road. He presented the cloth at the octroi post for payment of duty together with the invoice, but as the goods were of a value exceeding Rs. 25, the octroi clerk handed to him a memo, of entry directing him to produce the cloth at the head octroi office of the Board for the purposes of assessment and payment of dues. A counter part of this memo along with the invoice was sent to the head office in due course. The Courts below have found that Krishna Kumar did not present himself at the head office on the 14th May on which day the counterfoil reached there. Next morning the head office reported to the Executive Officer, and the latter thereupon ordered on the same day that Krishna Kumar be prosecuted u/s 155 of the U. P. Municipalities Act for evasion to pay the duty and under rule 144 of the Municipal Account Code for failure to get the assessment made. It appears that either on 15th of May 1944 or within a day or two of it Krishna Kumar approached the Junior Vice-Chairman of the Hirdji Municipality complaining to him that the head office people were refusing to take the memo, and that he should exert himself on his behalf in order to enable the payment of dues. 3. The Junior Vice-Chairman wrote to the Secretary Municipal Board asking him to take the dues and not to harass the applicant. Apparently no notice was taken of this note by the Secretary or the Executive Officer and the prosecution was launched on 18th May, 1944. Krishna Kumar thereafter approached the Municipality for compromising the matter. He was ordered to pay octroi on cloth of the value of Rs. 15,000 and to pay a penalty of Rs. Apparently no notice was taken of this note by the Secretary or the Executive Officer and the prosecution was launched on 18th May, 1944. Krishna Kumar thereafter approached the Municipality for compromising the matter. He was ordered to pay octroi on cloth of the value of Rs. 15,000 and to pay a penalty of Rs. 25, I may mention that according to the invoice the actual value of the cloth introduced into the Municipality was Rs. 5,550. There was an attempt to obtain a reconsideration of the aforesaid order, and eventually on 14th August, 1944, Krishna Kumar was directed to pay octroi on cloth worth Rs. 5,550, and in addition he was ordered to pay double the amount of octroi as penalty. This brought up the total amount demanded by the Municipality to the same figure as was originally demanded" by the Board, namely octroi on cloth worth Rs. 15,000 plus a penalty of Rs. 25 Krishna Kumar did not pay this amount, presumably because he thought that the attitude of the Board was unreasonable. The prosecution, therefore, was allowed to take its course. The learned Honorary Special Magistrate held that the accused was guilty both u/s 155 of the U. P. Municipalities Act as also under rule 144 of the Municipal vecount Code, and he accordingly convicted him under these sections and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 260-3-3 or in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months on the first count and Rs. 30 or 3 months imprisonment in default on the second. The order has been upheld by the Court below and Krishna Kumar has come up in revision. 4. Notice of the application has been served on the Municipal Board through its Executive Officer. No one, however, appears on behalf of the Board, and the learned Assistant Government Advocate informs ma that ha has no instructions. 5. I have heard the learned Counsel for the applicant, and I am of opinion that in the circumstances of this case Krishna Kumar must be acquitted of both the charges. 6. No one, however, appears on behalf of the Board, and the learned Assistant Government Advocate informs ma that ha has no instructions. 5. I have heard the learned Counsel for the applicant, and I am of opinion that in the circumstances of this case Krishna Kumar must be acquitted of both the charges. 6. Section 155 of the U, P. Municipalities Act is as follows A person introducing or attempting to introduce within octroi limits, or abetting the introduction within octroi limits, of any goods or animals liable to the payment of octroi for which the octroi due on introduction has neither been paid nor tendered, shall be punished with a fine which may extend either to ten times the value of such octroi or to fifty rupees, whichever is greater and shall not be less than twice the value of such octroi. 7. The words "introducing or attempting I to introduce or abetting the introduction" [import deliberate act or acts on the part of the person charged with the object of escaping or evading the duty. It is difficult to include within the contemplation of Section 155 cases where goods are brought into the municipal limits per invitum. I may grant that the intention to evade the duty is no longer an essential ingredient for establishing criminal liability as it was in Section 69 (2) of Act I of 1900. The section however, does not operate to render a man liable in spite of proof that he had no intention to evaie or defraud the Board but on the contrary repeatedly expressed his willingness to pay In Ganeshi Lal v. Emperor 1911 OA 393 : AWR (CC) 293 : OWN 182, Bennett, J. observed that Section 155 was intended to punish deliberate evasion of duty, and where it was proved by the accused that he had no intention to defraud, he could not be held guilty of the offence. 8. 8. On the facts of this case there can be no doubt that the goods with the invoice were taken to the octroi post with the intention of paying duty thereon, that the introduction into the Municipality was made at the request of the municipal authorities albeit with the instruction that the goods should be taken to the head office for assessment, that the accused never denied his liability to pay the octroi doss and that it was in fact with the object to discharge his liability that the invoice was left at the octroi barrier, and an attempt was made to induce the authorities through the junior Vice-Chairman and otherwise to accept what was legitimately due. Krishna Kumar's fault lay in not appearing at the head office forthwith but in delaying the matter for two or three days. It is not possible to deduce from this conduct I any deliberate intention or attempt to escape the payment of octroi. I may add that I am unable to understand the cause for unreasonable haste in which the prosecution of the accused was ordered. In the absence of any cause necessitating immediate action the ordinary procedure in such cases is to send a notice to the defaulter calling upon him to present him' self and make the necessary payment with in a specified time, and it is only when he deliberately defaults that the prosecution is launched. In the circumstances of this case I find it difficult to agree with the Court below that the crucial date, with reference to which the matter should be considered, is the 14th of May, 1944, or with the finding that Krishna Kumar wilfully introduced the goods into the municipal limits and fraudulently evade J the payment of duty. In my opinion the conviction of the applicant u/s 155 of the U. P. Municipalities Act is misconceived. 9. So far as the conviction under rule 144 of the Municipal Account Code is concerned relevant portion of sub rule (2) may be referred to. It is as follows If the value of the (consignment cannot be ascertained from the price current and is not less the in Rs. 9. So far as the conviction under rule 144 of the Municipal Account Code is concerned relevant portion of sub rule (2) may be referred to. It is as follows If the value of the (consignment cannot be ascertained from the price current and is not less the in Rs. 25 the muharir shall prepare a memorandum (of which he shall keep a copy), delivery it to the importer and direct him to take him goods with the memorandum to the head octro office where the octroi superintendent or the member in charge of octroi, shall make the assessment after such inquiry as he may think necessary, including an examination of the invoice, if produced. 10. Rule 223 provides At an outpost or railway barrier if an importer of goods, not having obtained a transit pass under rule 201 or rule 2Utf.........refused to take the goods to the head octroi office when required to do so, in accordance with rule 144 (2)............the muharrir shall prevent the goods from passing the barrier into the municipality, but shall permit them to be removed in the opposite direction. 11. The schedule prescribes a punishment of fine up to R. 50 for non-compliance of a number of provisions contained in the Code including rule 1+4 (2) The fact that tie memo, was granted to the applicant indicates that he did not refuse to take the goods to the head octroi office. Krishna Kumar would have been liable to punishment if he had omitted to take the me no within a reasonable time to the office as directed. The invoice was already with the authorities. The evidence disclosed that he personally approached them though perhaps a little late. The punishment provided by the Code is not for enforcing discipline but for ensuring that the importers should not defy or hoodwink the Municipality and escape with their goods scot free. lam convinced that the actions of Krishna Kumar do not render him liable for contravention of rule 144 (2). 12. I am assured by the learned Counsel for the applicant that his client is ready to and will immediately pay octroi on the cloth of the value of Rs. 5,550 which he brought into the municipality on 13th May, 1944. If he fails to make the payment it would then, I conceive, be legitimate to put the machinery of law in motion against him. 13. 5,550 which he brought into the municipality on 13th May, 1944. If he fails to make the payment it would then, I conceive, be legitimate to put the machinery of law in motion against him. 13. The circumstances so for disclosed indicate that the prosecution is premature. I accordingly allow the revision, set aside the conviction and sentence passed on Krishna Kumar by the learned Special Magistrate and direct that the fine, if deposited, be refunded to him.