STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. LAXMAN JAIRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by Special Leave against the decision of the High Court of Bombay dismissing the State's appeal against the acquittal of the respondent arises out of proceedings under S. 66 (1) (b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act (Act 25 of 1949 as amended), hereinafter called the 'Act'.

(2.) The respondent was arrested by Police Constable Laxman Sabaji on August 8,1959, at 8-15 p. m. on the ground that he was smelling of liquor and had therefore contravened the provisions of the Act. The respondent was taken to the hospital where he was examined by Dr. Dadlani Prabhu Rochiram P. W., who has deposed that the respondent was smelling of liquor but his speech, behaviour, gait, co-ordination and memory were normal. From this he concluded that the respondent had consumed some alcoholic substance but was not under the influence of liquor, in cross-examination he stated that Tincture Neem would produce blood concentration of 0-148% W/V of ethyl alcohol. The respondent in his examination under S. 342 stated:

(3.) The main question raised on behalf of the State is that by the introduction of S. 66 (2) in the Act as a result of the Bombay Prohibition (Extension and Amendment) Act, 1959 (Act 12 of 1959) the onus is on the accused person and that that onus had not been discharged in the present case. Section 66 (2) is as follows:-