PIRTHI RAJ Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition filed by Prithi Raj who has been convicted by a magistrate at Jullundur under Section 103 (2) of the. Cantonments Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 75/- or in default two months' simple imprisonment, his appeal being dismissed by the Sessions Judge.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that the accused who keeps a shop in Raman Mandi, jullundur Cantonment, under the title of Raman and Company, was served with a notice under Section 103 (1) of the Cantonments Act by the Executive Officer, jullundur Cantonment Board, on 8-12-1955 calling upon him to furnish detailed information within ten days about the value of the goods imported by his firm from the 1st of April to the 30th of September, 1955. A reminder was issued to him on the 22nd of December and the accused then sent the letter (Ex. P. B) dated the 24th of December in which he said that octroi duty had been paid on whatever goods he had imported into the Cantonment area, and that the record must be in the Cantonment Board office. He was again told by a notice dated the 29th of december that he must furnish the required information or else would be prosecuted, and he again wrote the letter (Ex. P. D) dated 11-1-1956 saying that the information was not available and could be collected from the records of the octroi department and he protested that the notice issued under Section 103 (1)was illegal.

(3.) THE provisions of Section 103 of the Act are as follows :