OM PARKASH Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) OM Parkash, Petitioner, is the owner of truck No HRR(sic) 6464, which was intercepted on the night between 26th and 27th September, 1968. This truck was being driven by Bhagwan Dass and was carrying some bags of rice and barley from Haryana to Rajasthan Bhagwan Dass, Jage Ram and Beni Parshad were tried and convicted under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon. Their appeal against their conviction and sentence was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Gurgaon. Their criminal revision was also dismissed by the High Court and the High Court while disposing of Criminal Revision No. 1142 of 1972, observed in its judgment dated 23rd September, 1974, as under:

(2.) TWO witnesses, namely, Beni Parshad (O. W. 1) and Bhagwan Dass (O W 2) were produced before the Chief Judical Magistrate(sic) by the present Petitioner. They were employees of the owner (i e the present Petitioner) and were convicted long(sic) with Jage Ram co -accused in the case in watch the truck was confiscated. I have also perused their evidence. There evidence does not inspire confidence. Moreover, the Petitioner did not appear himself in court so as to sty that he had no knowledge about the prying of the truck in question for smuggling of rice and barley(sic) from Haryana to Rajasthan and that he had gone to some other place. In my view, the truck is rightly confiscated to the State by the trial Court. Reliance was placed by the learned counsel for the petioner on Stats of Madhya Pradesh v. Azad Bharat Finance Co. and another A.I.R. 1967 S. C. 276. This was a case under the Opium Act and, on the facts of that case, the Supreme Court made observations to the effect that if the owner of a vehicle has no knowledge what soever(sic) that it was being used for transporting opium, then the vehicle could not be confiscated. But the Supreme Court also observed in para 5 of its judgment that "it is for toe Court to consider in each case whether the vehicle in which the contraband opium is found or is being transported should be confiscated or not having regard to all he circumstances of the case.

(3.) ACCORDINGLY this petition is dismissed.