STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. TIRATHDAS KHIYALDAS SINDHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRIMINAL Appeal No. 34 of 1987 is filed by the State for challenging an order of acquittal dated the 10th of October, 1986, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nandurbar, in Criminal Case No. 1734 of 1984. Criminal application No. 170 of 1987 is filed by Shri J. C. Shah, an advocate who was appearing for the respondent-accused before the trial court, seeking to expunge certain adverse remarks which have been made in paras 10 and 11 of the aforesaid judgment of the trial court

(2.) IN the trial, the accused was prosecuted under sections 3 and 7 of the Bombay Cinema Regulation Act, 1953 and Rule 30 of the Cinematography Rules, 1983 red with section 7 (a) Cinematography Act, 1952. On 31st of May, 1984 a police party attached to the Nandurbar city police station arranged for a raid. The raid was arranged in response to information received that the accused were exhibiting films in their Laxmi Video, Centre without a licence. The raiding party, which included two panch witnesses, came to the premises which are located near Amrut Theatre. They reached there at 8. 15 p. m. and found that a film T1maksadt was being shown. The accused did not hold a valid licence and the cassette carrying the film did not have a certificate of the Censor Board. Several articles such as T. V. , V. C. R. alongwith the cassette etc. were seized. The seized articles include a ticket book on which Laxmi Video Centre is printed. Certain account books were seized. Similarly, an iron sheet Board containing the advertisement of four shows of the film T1maksad being shown at the Laxmi Video Centre was seized. P. W. 4 - P. S. I. Badgujar lodged his complaint (Exhibit 23) and the three accused before the Court were prosecuted. At the trial, the prosecution examined P. W. 1 Manilal Tamboli, who was one of the 18 viewers of the film at the time of the raid. He has deposed in terms of the case of the prosecution. In addition, the prosecution examined several police officers who had taken part in the raid, they are P. W. 4 Badgujar, a P. S. I. , P. W. 2 More, a Head Constable, P. W. 3 Jagdale, a Police Constable and P. W. 7 Patil, a P. S. I. , all attached to the Nandurbar city police station. The prosecution examined P. W. 5 Bansilal Chaudhari, a panch witness who declined to support the prosecution. In addition, the prosecution also examined P. W. 6 Dulab Motiram, the second panch. He also declined to support the prosecution. Both the panch witnesses were declared hostile.

(3.) THE accused pleaded not guilty. As far as accused No. 1 is concerned, he has admitted his presence at the time of the raid. All the accused have also admitted that several articles such as V. D. O. , T. V. Amplifier, Fan, etc. were seized under the Panchanama (Exhibit 25 ).