RAM JIWAN GUPTA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are two Criminal Revisions. Criminal Revision No. 1785 of 1965 is by Ram Jiwan Gupta while Criminal Revision No. 2294 of 1966 is by Gur Bachan Singh. Ram Jiwan Gupta has filed his revision against his conviction and sentence of a fine of Rs. 200/ - , in default two months' simple imprisonment Under Section 13 of the UP Roadside Land Control Act - -hereinafter called the Act - -and Gur Bachan Singh has filed his revision against his conviction and sentence of a fine of Rs. 200/ - in default one months simple imprisonment under the same section. Both the revisions arise out of separate prosecutions, but as the points involved in them are the same, they can be conveniently disposed of by a common judgment.

(2.) THE case for the prosecution in Criminal Revision No. 1785 of 1965 is that Ram Jiwan Gupta, the Applicant, constructed a building within 220 feet from the centre of the Meerut -Baghpat Road near the 5th mile and first furlong. The case for the prosecution in criminal revision Mo. 2294 of 1936 is that Gur Bachan Singh, the Applicant, made a construction within 220 feet from the centre of the Delhi -Meerut Road near the 36th mile and the fifth furlong. In both these cases the prosecution case further was that the roads in question were "controlled areas" Under Section 3(2) of the Act and as the Applicants had made their respective constructions within those areas without the permission of the Collector Under Section 5 of the Act, they were liable to conviction Under Section 13 of the Act.

(3.) THE prosecution produced witnesses to prove that the offending constructions were made recently, while the Applicants led evidence in support of their version. The learned Magistrate rejected the defence evidence and finding that of the prosecution satisfactory convicted and sentenced the Applicants, and, on appeal, the lower appellate court affirmed the same. Hence these revisions.