HIRA LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HIRA Lal, Gbirau Lal, Mohan Lal, Atma Bam and Phool Chand applicants were tried along with one Budhdhi Lal by the Sub. Divisional Magistrate, Nanpara in the District of Bahraioh for an offence under Section 23 of the Petroleum Act, for storing at Katarniaghat 744 tins of kerosene oil more than 500 gallons in bulk, without licence and thus violating Rule 90 of the Petroleum Rules. Out of them Budhdhi Lal was acquitted and the rest convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 400/- each. The five who were thus convicted filed an appeal which was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bahraioh. It is against that judgment that they have come up to this Court in revision.

(2.) ATMA Ram and Mohan Lal applicants are the partners of a firm known as Budhdhi Lal and SOUP. The firm deals in kerosene oil as an Agent of Burmah Shell. The applicant Phool Ohand is the Muneem of the firm. Ghirau Lal and Hira Lal applicants, father and son, have a certain shop in Katarniaghat.

(3.) A consignment of 700 tins of superior kero. sene oil and 44 tins of inferior kerosene oil of which the Burmah Shell were the consignors and the firm Budhdhi Lal and Sons the consignees, arrived at Kataraiaghat Railway Station on the 8th December, 1962. Delivery was taken on behalf of the firm and Phool Chand their Muneem on the 11th December, 1962 who took them to the shop of Ghirau Lal and Hira Lal where they were stored. It was the period when we were facing the Chinese aggression. On the 18th December, 1962 the District Magistrate of Bahraich passed an order requiring all the dealers in kerosene oil to declare their stocks. The firm Budhdhi Lal and Sons also declared their stock indicating that there were 697 tins of superior and 40 tins of inferior kerosene oil in stock. The firm had two licenses for storage one for Bahraich and the other for Nanpara. It had no licence for storing kerosene oil above 500 gallons at Katarniaghat. On the 24th December, 1962 the Deputy Superintendent of Police, S. P. Dube p. w. 6 along with Sub-Inspector Kalap Nath P. W. 2 came to the shop of Ghirau Lal and Hira Lal at Eatarniaghat and found 681 1/2 tins of superior kerosene oil and 44 tins of inferior kerosene oil stored there. These tics, it is not disputed, were out of the same consignment of 744 tins of superior and inferior kerosene oil which bad been received by the firm through its Mimeera Phool Chand. The remaining is tins of kerosene oil out of that consignment had been sold away. The District Supply Officer Indra Deo Sharma p. w. 7 called for an explanation from the firm Budhdhi Lal and Sons as to why they had stored kerosene oil at Katarniaghat without a storage licence. In reply to this an explanation (EX. Ka. 12) was submitted by the firm through its partner Mohan Lal to the effect that this firm held storage licences for Bahraich and Nanpara, that the Burmah Shell were sending consignments to different stations for the convenience of their agents and for saving unnecessary railway freight, that the consignments if and when received by the firm Budhdhi Lal and Sons at other stations used to be distributed among its customers direct from the Railway Goods-Shed. The consignment in question was received at Katarniaghat Railway Station under the storage licence of Nanpara in order to be distributed among the customers of the firm and after the delivery the entire goods were taken to the shop of Ghirau Lal and Hira Lal just to avoid wharfage but subsequently that stock bad been taken to Bahraich for which the firm held the storage licence. It was taken there in accordance with the orders of the District Supply Officer on the 27th December 1962. The stand taken by the firm therefore, appears to be that the stock of 725 1/2 tins of kerosene oil had been stored at the shop of Ghirau Lal and Hira Lal as a temporary measure. The authorities were not satisfied with this explanation. The applicants along with Budhdhi Lal were prosecuted with the result that Budhdhi Lal was acquitted while the remaining five applicants were convicted. The facts stated above are not in dispute. The plea on behalf of the two partners of Budhdhi Lal and Sons was that they were asked to donate liberally to the National Defence Fund by the district authorities but as the district authorities were not satisfied with the contributions that they made, they were prosecuted in the case.