Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 947 (PAT)

Deo Narayan Sah v. State Of Bihar

2001-10-08

INDU PRABHA SINGH

body2001
Judgment I.P.Singh, J. 1. The sole appellant has been convicted under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months. 2. The prosecution case in short is that on the written report dated 1.7.1986 submitted by the informant Chandra Mohan Deo Shrivastava, the then Supply Inspector, Sonbarsa is that after getting confidential information that some K. oil loaded on several tyre-carts were going to Nepal for sale in black-market. He along with other members of the raiding party reached at village Bhutahi and found that six tyre-carts loaded with 29 drums K. oil and diesel were proceeding towards Nepal and the said tyre-carts along with 29 drums of K. oil and diesel were brought to market complex of Surendra Prasad and the same were given in custody of him and also Sitaram Mishra. It is stated that on 28.6.1986 as per direction given by the CO., Sonbarsa the informant came to Sitamarhi and verified the supply of K. oil and diesel from Firms M/s Bajrang Lal and brothers, Station Road, Sitamarhi and Ganga Ram-Rameshwar Lal, Kote Bazar, Sitamarhi. It has been stated that it was Saturday which was weekly closing day of the market hence he contacted the properties of the above firms and verified the matter and after verification it transpired that 22 drums of K. oil and 2 drums of diesel were supplied by the aforesaid 2 firms to the dealers of Bathnaha and Sonbarsa Circles. Other 5 drums of K. oil loaded on a tyre-cart of co-accused Mahendra Paswan was not supplied by the aforesaid firms hence the aforesaid 5 drums of K. oil containing 222 litres K. oil in each drum along with the tyrecart of co-accused Mahendra Paswan was seized. It has been stated that the cartman Mahendra Paswan did not show any paper relating to the aforesaid 5 drums of K. oil and he gave confessional statement that the aforesaid 5 drums of K. oil have been purchased by the appellant Deo Narain Sah from the shop of Bhola Babu reported at Kote Bazar, Sitamarhi and the same was being carried on his tyre-cart to village Khopraha on hire and the said 5 drums were seized at Bhutahi. It has been further stated that the appellant Deo Narain Sah had purchased the aforesaid 5 drums of K. oil and he was carrying the same on his tyre-cart for black marketing the same in Nepal territory. On the basis of written report, Sonbarsa P.S. Case No. 52 of 1986 was registered and FIR was drawn up and after completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons. Cognizance was taken and subsequently, the trial concluded with the result as Indicated above and the appellant pleaded not guilty and stated that he has falsely been implicated in the case. 3. The prosecution in support of his case examined altogether four witnesses. PW 1, is Sitaram Mishra, PW 2 is Surendra Prasad, PW 3 is Chandra Mohan Deo Shrivastava (informant) and PW 4 is Ram Pavitra Singh. He is I.O. of the case. PW 1 has stated that on 27.6.1986, the CO., Sonbarsa seized many drums of K. oil along with tyre-carts near the mill of Surendra Prasad. According to him, on 2.7.1986, the informant Ram Pavitra Singh also seized 5 drums of K. oil and one tyrecart in his presence at village Bhutahi and seizure list was prepared and one witness Bhikhari Nayak who also put his signatures over the seizure list. According to him, the said 5 drums of K. oil was given in the custody of Surendra Prasad by the order of the Collector, Sitamarhi. 4. PW 2 during his examination-in-chief has stated that on 27/ 28.6.1986, CO.. Sonbarsa seized 29 drums of K. oil and diesel from 6 tyrecarts and the same were given to him in his custody. He has stated that he wrote ztmanama. According to him, 24 drums of K. oil and 2 drums of diesel were released by the CO., Sonbarsa and 5 drums of K. oil remained with him. He has stated that he put his signature on zimanama and PW 3 (the informant) Chandra Mohan Deo Shrivastava has fully supported the case of the prosecution. According to him, on 27.6.1986 on the direction of CO., Sonbarsa he went to the market complex of Surendra Prasad and found 29 drums of K. oil and diesel loaded on six tyre-carts. He has stated that he put his signature on zimanama and PW 3 (the informant) Chandra Mohan Deo Shrivastava has fully supported the case of the prosecution. According to him, on 27.6.1986 on the direction of CO., Sonbarsa he went to the market complex of Surendra Prasad and found 29 drums of K. oil and diesel loaded on six tyre-carts. According to him, the K. oil and diesel belonged to the different businessman and for verifying the fact he went to Sitamarhi on 28.6.1986 and visited the shops of M/s. Ganga Ram Rameshwar Lal, Kote Bazar, Sitamarhi and Bajrang Lal and brothers near Railway goods office, Sitamarhi. According to him, he came to know that 22 drums of K. oil and 2 drums of diesel were purchased by the different dealers of Bathnaha and Sonbarsa, hence he released 22 drums of K. oil and 2 drums of diesel after verifying the relevant papers relating to the same. He has stated that no paper relating to 5 drums of K. oil loaded on the tyre- cart of accused Mahendra Paswan was produced. He has stated that the accused Mahendra Paswan told him that the aforesaid 5 drums of K. oil belonged to the appellant Deo Narain Sah and the same was being carried for smuggling and black-marketing in Nepal territory. He gave 5 drums of K. oil in custody of Surendra Prasad and Sitaram Mishra. According to him, the confessional statement of the accused Mahendra Paswan in presence of one Sri Jai Krishna Jha, CO., who also put his signature over the same. 5. PW 4 is the I.O. Ram Pavitra Singh. According to him, on 1.7.1986 written report of the informant PW 3 Chandra Mohan Deo Srivastava was received through letter No. 676 dated 1.7.1986 which was issued by CO., Sonbarsa. On the basis of the aforesaid written report, the FIR was drawn up. He has stated that he had investigated the case and visited the market complex of Surendra Prasad at Bhutahi and seized the 5 drums of K. oil and prepared seizure list in presence of witness Sitaram Mishra. According to him, he visited the place of occurrence which was situated near the Sub-registry Office, Bhutahi from where he including the raiding party seized 29 drums of K. oil and diesel loaded on six tyre-carts and brought the same to the market complex of Surendra Prasad. According to him, he visited the place of occurrence which was situated near the Sub-registry Office, Bhutahi from where he including the raiding party seized 29 drums of K. oil and diesel loaded on six tyre-carts and brought the same to the market complex of Surendra Prasad. According to him, he recorded the statement of the witnesses. From the deposition of the witnesses, it has been established that the 5 drums of K. oil were found on the tyre- carts which was carried by the co-accused Mahendra Paswan and according to his statement he stated that the same belonged to the appellant Deo Narain Sah. On the basis of the oral as well as documentary evidence as adduced on behalf of the prosecution, the Court below convicted the appellant under Section 7 of the E.C Act for violation of the provisions as laid down under Section 3 of the E.C. Act. I do not find any reason to interfere with the conviction of the appellant. 6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the occurrence took place in 1986 and the appellant is above 75 years old. Therefore, some lenient view may be taken while awarding sentence to the appellant. 7. Having regard to the submission raised on behalf of the counsel for the appellant and in the facts and circumstances of the case that the appellant is above 75 years old and there is no criminal antecedent and previous conviction against him. As also the occurrence took place 15 years ago and he has been amply harassed during the prolonged litigation lasting for 15 years. Now it would not be proper to send him again in jail to serve out the remaining period of sentence. It will be expedient in the interest of justice if he is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-to be deposited by the appellant within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and in default to undergo R.I. for one month. 8. With the aforesaid modification in the sentence, this appeal is dismissed.