OM PRAKASH AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Om Prakash and Daya Krishna Sharma have filed this revision against the order of the Sessions Judge Bulandshahr rejecting their application in revision against their conviction under sub-sec. (3) of Sec. 5 of the U. P. Entertainments and Betting Tax Act. Om Prakash is the licensee of the Damodar Talkies, Sikandrabad, district Bulandshahr, and Daya Krishna Sharma is the manager employed by him. At an inspection on the 26th of April 1955 it was found that the auditorium contained three seats more than those allowed under Condition No. 8 of the License and that three persons who had not paid the Entertainment Tax occupied them. Consequently the two applicants were prosecuted and the learned Magistrate convicted them of the offence under Sub-Sec: (3) of Sec. 5 of the Act.

(2.) The learned Sessions Judge observed certain irregularities which the learned magistrate had committed during the trial of the case but held that they did not prejudice the accused. I entirely agree with this view of the learned Sessions Judge. Om.Prakash was not present at the time and Daya Krishna Sharma, in answer to the question whether there were three persons without tickets in the box near the first class or the ladie's class, replied in the affirmative adding that they were of the staff. He did not allege that they had paid the Entertainment Tax. In view of this statement of his there could be no prejudice to his case by the learned magistrate committing the alleged irregularities. The conviction of the applicants is not therefore bad on this ground. It is further contended that both Om Prakash and Daya Krishna Sharma cannot be convicted for this offence.

(3.) Sub-sec. (3) of Sec. 5 of the Act is: