JOHN HAMILTON CHRISTIAN Vs. SHAM CRIMPERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal, under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 2.8.1997 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Surat in Criminal Appeal No. 43 of 1989 whereby the learned Sessions Judge has acquitted the accused for the offences punishable under Section 13 and 21 of the Octroi Act read with Section 398 of the BPMC Act, by setting aside the order of the learned Magistrate dated 4.10.1989 passed in Criminal Case No. 196 of 1984. The learned Sessions Judge by the said judgment and order has also dismissed the Criminal Revision Application No. 5 of 1990 filed by the appellant.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:

(3.) TO prove the case against the accused, the prosecution has examined five witnesses and also produced the documentary evidence before the learned Magistrate. At the end of trial and after hearing arguments on behalf of prosecution and the defence, the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class (Muni.), Surat has ordered the penalty for five times for respondents No. 1 and 2 and for respondents No. 3, 4, 5 and 6 three times penalty was imposed for the said octroi amount of Rs. 23,988/ - in respect of the said machine which is valued at Rs. 9,59,519.52ps and convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Section 13(1)(e), Section 21 of Octroi Act read with Section 398 of the BPMC Act. That order of conviction was challenged by the original accused before the learned Sessions Court at Surat and the appeal was registered as Criminal Appeal No. 43 of 1989. It was heard at length by the learned Sessions Judge and the learned Sessions Judge has observed that there was a lacuna in the production of the evidence of the prosecution and the order of the conviction was set aside by the learned Sessions Judge by judgment and order dated 2.8.1997.