BRIJESH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these three appeals have arisen out of the same judgment and order dated 10.6.2003, so these are being adjudicated together. Appellant Diwan Singh (A1), son of Dev Singh, Himmat Singh (A2), Brijesh (A3), Prempal/Prem Singh (A4) and Anees Ahmad (A5) have been convicted under Section 60 of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910 (for brevity, hereinafter called as the 'Act'). They were sentenced to one and half years' rigorous imprisonment nay the fine of rupees twenty five thousand by each.

(2.) THE brief facts as emerging out from the entire prosecution story are that the Station Officer of the Police Station Satpuli noticed a truck under suspicious circumstances coming from the side of Kotdwar and the same went towards Pauri. He had already got an information from some unknown person regarding the said vehicle. So, he along with his fellow police personnel chased the said truck and got it stopped. A Maruti Van was also pursuing that truck. A1 and A2 were in the van. When the persons sitting in the truck, who were A3 and A4, saw that they are going to be intercepted by the police, so the truck driver A5 stopped the same and A3 and A4 jumped from the truck and ran towards the bushes down to the hilly road. They were nabbed by the police. When the arresting police officer returned towards the truck, driver was also standing beside the truck. So, he was also arrested. Meanwhile, the police also noticed the Maruti Van and it was also got stopped because the persons sitting inside the Maruti Van A1 and A2 were calling the A3 and A4 and asking them to sit in the Maruti Van. Thereafter the truck was searched, which was found loaded with 135 bags. Each bag was having 200 pouches of contraband liquor. These 27,000/ - pouches of contraband liquor was allegedly recovered either from the direct or indirect possession of all these accused persons.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel of the appellants has raised a very significant argument before this Court regarding the failure on the part of the police officers to make the compliance of Section 53 of the Act. For the sake of convenience, Section 53 is reproduced below: