ARJUN SHANKAR KUMBHAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this revision the petitioner has impugned the judgment and order dated 22-2-1992 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Thane, in Criminal Appeal No. 10/91 whereby the judgment and order dated 14-2-1991 passed by the J. M. F. C. , First Court, Kalyan, in S. C. C. No. 8632 of 1991 convicting and sentencing him to undergo R. I. for 1 month and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- in default to undergo R. I. for 10 days for the offence punishable under sections 85 (1) of the Bombay Prohibition Act has been confirmed.

(2.) IN short the prosecution case is that on 8-9-88 Dilip Daware who was serving as in charge of Thane S. T. bus stand along with Babasaheb Patil P. W. 2, was on patrol duty and at about 8. 30 p. m. when they reached S. T. Stand some passengers complained to them that the petitioner who was conductor in Bus No. MTD 8453 had consumed alcohol. Accordingly they went to the bus and found that the petitioner was sitting on the conductors seat under the influence of alcohol. They took him to the office of the Deputy Manager and thereafter to Mahatma Phule Chowk Police Station where the F. I. R. was lodged. After the F. I. R. he was sent for medical examination in K. M. C. dispensary at Ambernath, where Dr. Satpute found that he was smelling of alcohol, his pupils were dilated, gait was steady, speech was rational and pulse was 100 per minute. After usual investigation the petitioner was chargesheeted for an offence under section 85 (1) of the Bombay Prohibition Act. As mentioned in paragraph 1 the trial Court found him guilty for the said offence and the Appellate Court dismissed his appeal.

(3.) THE submission of Mr. Mundergi is that the conviction of the petitioner for the offence under section 85 (1) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, is unsustainable because there is no evidence to show that he was behaving in a disorderly manner under the influence of drink.