JUDGMENT Gyanendra Kumar, J. - These are two connected appeals under Sec. 417, Cr. P. C. filed by Nagar Mahapalika, Varanasi against an order of acquittal recorded by the Assistant Sessions Judge in appeals preferred before him by the accused. Both these appeals arise out of the same case. Appeal No. 1827 of 1961 has been filed against the acquittal of Chaman Lal accused, while appeal No. 1828 of 1961 has been filed against the acquittal of his master Mahadeo Prasad accused. 2. The facts giving rise to these appeals, briefly stated are that the appellant Mahadeo Prasad imported 584 Maunds of "bhusa" within the octroi limits of the Municipal Board Varanasi under the Railway Receipts dated 21-1-56, 23-1-56 and 28-1-56. The consignments duly arrived at the Kashi Goods Shed, Benares. The actual deliveries from the Railway were taken by him through the other appellant Chaman Lal, who is the Munim of Mahadeo Prasad appellant, without payment of octroi dues amounting to Rs. 18.25 Np. On 8-2-56, the then Municipal Board sent a notice Ex. K-1 to the accused Mahadeo Prasad demanding payment of the octroi dues but the accused omitted to make the requisite payment. Hence, the Municipal Board filed a complaint against the two accused in the court of the City Magistrate, Varanasi for the infringement of Sec. 155 of the U.P. Municipalities Act and Rule 159 of the Municipal Account Code. It was both proved and admitted that the Kashi Goods Shed was situate within the octroi limits of the Benares Municipal Board. 3. The defence of both the accused was that they did not introduce the goods within the octroi limits, that the delivery of goods was taken through the Railway Receipts in question at the Kashi Goods Shed by the accused Mahadeo Prasad through his Munim Chaman Lal accused without payment of octroi dues, inasmuch as the goods had not been introduced by them within the octroi limits of the Benares Municipal Board. Thus both the accused admitted of the delivery of goods on the basis of the Railway Receipts in question through the agency of Chaman Lal Munim. Thus both the accused admitted of the delivery of goods on the basis of the Railway Receipts in question through the agency of Chaman Lal Munim. Their plea in short was that the goods having already arrived at the Kashi Goods Shed situate within the octroi limits of the Municipal Board, Benares the act of their introduction was complete as soon as the goods arrived at the Kashi Goods Shed, as such there was no question of "introducing or attempting to introduce" the said goods once again within the octroi limits of the Municipal Board. Under the circumstances the accused were not liable to pay any octroi dues in respect thereof, inasmuch as they only removed the goods from one part of the octroi limits to another part of such limits. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge accepted the defence argument and held that none of the two accused was guilty either under Sec. 155 of the U.P. Municipalities Act or Rule 159 of the Municipal Account Code. 4. Mr. Yashodanandan has appeared on behalf of the appellant Nagar Mahapalika but nobody has put in appearance on behalf of the accused-respondents. 5. We have heard Mr. Yashodanandan at some length and are of the opinion that the learned Sessions Judge did not correctly interpret the provisions of Sec. 155 of the U.P. Municipalities Act. It is true that the section is not very happily worded. A perusal of Rules 131 and 133 of the Municipal Account Code makes it abundantly clear that all types of goods are not leviable with octroi duty. Only certain varieties or articles have been made liable for payment of octroi duty, when introduced into the octroi limits of the Municipal Board. 6. An article of food for animals, such as "Bhusa", is one of the commodities on which octroi has been made leviable. During the course of transit, the Railway wagons containing various commodities booked for different destinations and belonging to various persons arrive at or pass through the Kashi Goods Shed. Such wagon loads of goods cannot reasonably be said to have been "introduced" into the octroi limits of the Municipal Board, Benares so as to make them liable for payment of octroi. 7. Such wagon loads of goods cannot reasonably be said to have been "introduced" into the octroi limits of the Municipal Board, Benares so as to make them liable for payment of octroi. 7. Likewise, during the course of transit, from one end of the country to the other, the Railway wagons containing leviable goods may arrive at dozens of railway stations or goods sheds situate within the octroi limits of various Municipal Boards, still the goods would not be deemed to have been introduced at all those points into the various octroi limits for the purposes of payment of octroi duty thereon. 8. It often happens that a particular closed and sealed wagon contains several types of goods, some of which may not be at all leviable with octroi duty. Such a Railway Wagon is evidently not leviable with any octroi duty. The particular commodity which was liable for payment of octroi cannot therefore be said to have been introduced into the octroi limits of Benares Municipal Board merely on account of arrival in the Kashi Goods Shed. The different leviable contents of the railway wagon can be said to have been introduced into the octroi limits within the meaning of Sec. 155 of the U.P. Municipalities Act only when the wagon has been unloaded, the commodities meant for different persons have been sorted out or separated and when after the delivery to the consignee, they are actually taken into the octroi limits in such separated and individualistic shape and form. 9. In this connection we may refer to two decisions of this Court, namely, Sheikh Ajmeri v. Emp., A.I.R. 1934 Allahabad 39 = 1934 A.L.J. 80 and Raj Narain Verma v. Emp., A.I.R. 1934 Allahabad 318. In both these cases it was held that the words "introducing or attempting to introduce within the octroi limits" occurring in Sec. 155 of the U.P. Municipalities Act imply the introduction of dutiable articles from a place altogether outside the Municipal limits and brought into such limits. They are not meant to cover a case of transit, where goods are transferred from one part of the Municipality to another part within its limits. Where there is an intervening space between two parts of a Municipal area and goods are taken from one part to another, it cannot be said that such goods have been introduced within the octroi limits of the Municipal Board. Where there is an intervening space between two parts of a Municipal area and goods are taken from one part to another, it cannot be said that such goods have been introduced within the octroi limits of the Municipal Board. The significance of the word "introducing" is that they must be imported from outside the Municipal limits altogether. 10. The facts in both the above cases were different from those of the instant case. They did not deal with a situation like the present, where goods have been brought from out stations by the Railway in its wagons into its own goods shed which is itself situate within the octroi limits of the Municipal Board. 11. Our attention has, however, been invited to an unreported case decided by Ramabhadran, J. on 2-3-62 Nagar Mahapalika Varanasi v. Bhola, Cr.A. No. 316 of 1961 which dealt with a similar situation as involved in the present case. The judgment in that case does not contain detailed reasons for the view taken by the learned Judge but with respect we entirely agree with his conclusions and findings. In this view of the matter, the goods in question were introduced into the octroi limits of Benares Municipal Board by or at the instance of the accused, only when they entered those limits in the form of commodity made leviable under the provisions of the Act and the Code. We, therefore, find that the acquittal of the respondents was illegal and they were liable to be convicted under Sec. 155 of the U.P. Municipalities Act. 12. As for the breach of Rule 159 of the Municipal Account Code, it may be mentioned that the Judge was again wrong. It is true that under rule 159, the importer of the goods has to undergo certain necessary procedure contemplated in that rule, failing which he is liable to be challenged and punished under Sec. 299 read with Sec. 153 of the Municipalities Act. The real importer in this case was the accused Mahadeo Prasad alone while Chaman Lal accused was only his delegate or agent. However, if the importer was bound to follow a particular procedure prescribed by rule 159, it follows that his delegates or agent, who had undertaken or had been entrusted to take delivery of the goods, was equally bound to conform to that procedure. However, if the importer was bound to follow a particular procedure prescribed by rule 159, it follows that his delegates or agent, who had undertaken or had been entrusted to take delivery of the goods, was equally bound to conform to that procedure. Mahadeo Prasad and Chaman Lal accused having both failed to comply with the requirements of rule 159 of the Municipal Account Code, they were both guilty for having committed the breach of rule 159 of the Code and were liable to be punished for the same. 13. We, therefore, allow the appeal, set aside the order of acquittal passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge and maintain their conviction and sentences as imposed by the learned Magistrate. In the circumstances of this case it was not necessary for the Magistrate to have imposed a separate sentence for the breach of rule 159 of the Municipal Account Code. The sentence of fine on each of the accused as imposed had rightly met the ends of justice. However, the Magistrate was in error in having inflicted rigorous imprisonment in default of payment of fine by the accused. That part of the order and sentence of the Magistrate is set aside. We further direct that the amount of fine if realised shall be paid to the appellant, Nagar Mahapalika, Varanasi.