HARI CHARAN TANTI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has been convicted Under Section 120 of the Indian Railways Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of five days. Prosecution case is that on 5-1-1965 the petitioner was in a state of intoxication, abused and assaulted P. W. 2. (Welfare Inspector) at the jharsuguda Railway Station. The petitioner in his statement Under Section 342, Cr. P. C. states that P. W. 2 had taken a loan of Rs. 10/- from him. On the date of occurrence he met him on the railway platform and demanded repayment This led to a quarrel between them.

(2.) THE learned Magistrate accepted the prosecution version and held that the petitioner was under the influence of liquor. While doing so he has overlooked many important factors in support of the prosecution case

(3.) MR. Misra contends that on the finding that the petitioner was under the influence of liquor, the conviction cannot be sustained This necessitates examination of the scope of Section 120 of the Indian Railways Act.