KUNJILAL AND MOTHER Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Art. 136 of the Constitution is filed against an order of the High Court of Judicature of Nagpur, passed in revision under the following circumstances.

(2.) The two appellants, Kunjilal and Deopal, who are father and son, the latter being aged 17, were prosecuted under Ss. 392 and 332, I. P. C. in the Court of the Magistrate Sagar. They were sentenced under the former to 1 year's rigorous imprisonment and under the latter to a fine of Rs. 500/- each. Their convictions were uphold on appeal but Kunjilal's sentence was reduced to six months' R. I. and Rs. 350/. fine, while Deopal was bound over under S. 562, Criminal P. C. and the sentence of imprisonment was set aside. His fine was reduced under S. 332 I. P. C:to Rs. 250/-. They carried the matter further in revision to the High Court but it was dismissed.

(3.) It appears that the export of certain essential supplies such as rice and ghee was prohibited from Madhya Pradesh to another State and any person contravening the prohibition was guilty of an offence under S. 7, Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946. Three bullock carts belonging to the appellants and carrying bags of rice and tins of ghee were crossing the river Dhasan on the Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh border on 1-3-1949. Head Constable Abdul Samad on receiving information reached the spot, seized the prohibited goods and brought the carts back tto shahgarh in Madhya Pradesh. When they reached the jungle near Shahgarh the two appellants are alleged to have beaten the Head Constable and taken away the property seized to the house of Paltu Bania at Bagrohi. They were accordingly charged under Ss. 332 and 392, I. P. C for voluntarily causing hurt to a public servant in the discharge of his duty as such public servant and also for robbing him of the goods seized by him. The appellants denied the offence. They pleaded that the goods were not being exported to Uttar Pradesh but to a place called Baraitha and that they did not beat the Head Constable. The Magistrate who tried the appellants found that both the offences were proved against the appellants. He accepted the prosecution evidence both on the point of beating us well as on the point of exporting the contraband goods. The Medical evidence supported the prosecution case. The appellants were accordingly convicted and sentenced as stated above.