ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the accused No.3 in CC. No.35/91 on the file of the Judl. 1st class Magistrate, Bichkunda. He is charged with alleged offences under Sec.34(a) of A.P.Excise Act, 1968 read with Rule 9 of A.P. Foreign Liquor and Indian Liquor Rules, 1970 and Import Permit Conditions 5, 6 and 7, along with four others. The petitioner prays for quashing the proceedings in so far as he is concerned on the ground that the allegations against him contained in the charge-sheet, do not reveal or constitute any offence.

(2.) The petitioner is the owner of the lorry "bearing No.ABT 1679 and he is a resident of Hyderabad. His lorry was seized on 6-8-90 by the SI of Police, Excise, Range, Bichkunda, for transporting liquor under a permit issued in favour of accused No.1, who is licensed to transport with the help of A-5. For alleged violation of Rule 9 of the A.P. Foreign Liquor and Indian Liquor Rules, 1970 ('the Rules' for short) and Import Permit Conditions 5 to 7 (permit conditions', for short), the driver and cleaner of the lorry (A-1 and A-2 respectively) along with A-4 and A-5, were arrested. Later on, the petitioner (accused No.3) was also arrested on 11-1-1991.

(3.) Sri Pattabhi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the facts alleged in the charge-sheet against the petitioner do not constitute any offence, inasmuch as the petitioner is only the owner of the lorry in question and no specific act is attributed to him to show that he was directly involved in transporting the liquor in violation of the provisions of law and as such, the proceedings should be quashed.