Thadani C. J-The appellant Md. Akram, has been convicted by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Shillong, under S. 5, Imports and Exports (Control) Act (XVIII [18] of 1947) read with s. 511, Penal Code, and sentenced to rigourous imprisonment) for 6 (six) months, and to pay a fine of BS. 500, or in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 3 months. The appellant A. B. Nagi has been convicted under the same saction of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 and s 511, Penal Code, read with S. 114, Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months and to pay a fine of Hs. 500, or in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 3 months. [2] The case for the prosecution was that on 30 8-49, at about 3-30 P. M., the appellants who were going in a motor car No. B. G. Q, 215 (Ex. XLI) were stopped at the Dawki Gate-a Frontier Customs Post between India and Pakistan- and their car searched. In the search, certain motor car parts were recovered from their possession. The car and the parts were seized, and on completion of the investigation, the appellants were sent up for trial. [3] It is conceded by Mr. Barman for the prosecution that the appellants had not gone out of the Indian Union, and that the motor parts were seized from their possession at the Indian Customs Post. The words "import and export" are defined in the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, as meaning respectively 'bringing into and taking out of British India (now India) by area, land or air'. Barman hag conceded that at the time of the seizure of the motor parts, they had not bean taken out of India. [4] The word "offence" is denned in 8. 40, Penal Code. It denotes a thing made punishable by the Penal Code and the wood 'offence' mentioned in S3. 64, 65, 66, 67, 71, 109, 110, 112, 114, 115,116,117,187,194,195,303, 211,213, 214,221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 327, 328, 329, 330, 331, 347, 348, 388, 389 and 445 denotes a thing punishable under the Penal Code or any special or local law. It is significant that S. 511, Penal Code, is omitted from S. 40, Penal Code.
64, 65, 66, 67, 71, 109, 110, 112, 114, 115,116,117,187,194,195,303, 211,213, 214,221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 327, 328, 329, 330, 331, 347, 348, 388, 389 and 445 denotes a thing punishable under the Penal Code or any special or local law. It is significant that S. 511, Penal Code, is omitted from S. 40, Penal Code. In other words, unless an attempt to commit an offence under a special or local law has been expressly made punishable under the Special or local law it cannot be punished under the Penal Code. Mr. Barman while conceding that the learned Magistrate was in error is convicting the appellants for an attempt of an offence under 8. 6,of Act xviii [18] of 1947, contended that the learned Magistrate has interpreted the words "taking out of British India" as meaning 'in the process of taking out of British India,1 for which view, he has rightly stated, there was no justification, [5] The conviction recorded against the appellant Md. Akram under 8. 6 of ActXVin [18] read with S. 511, Penal Code, must, therefore, be set aside. Similarly, the conviction against the appellant Nagi who has been convicted for abetting the alleged attempt, must be set aside. [6] The result is that the convictions and sentences are set aside and the appellants are acquitted. Their bail bonds will stand dis. charged. [7] Ram Labhaya J.-I agree. Appeal allowed.