SATYADEO SAH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two Criminal Revisions Nos. 1558 and 2051 of 1963 arise out of the same judgment and as such they have been heard together and they will be governed by this order.

(2.) Satyadeo Sah petitioner in Criminal Revision No. 1558 of 1968 has a fair price grain shop in village Shitalpore, Police-Station Manjhi in the district Saran. On 24-10-1965 a petition was filed before the Additional District Magistrate by some of the villagers alleging that in the previous night at about 10 p.m. a bullock cart with seven bags of imported wheat was apprehended near Lal Gachi, about a mile away from Shitalpur Bazar. The cart was being driven by one Sukhdeo Singh, the petitioner in Criminal Revision No. 2051 of 1968. Satyadeo Sah was also going along with the cart. When the villagers flashed their torch light towards the cart, both the petitioners fled away leaving the loaded cart. The Additional District Magistrate forwarded the above petition to the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Chapra Sadar with the following notes:-- "Immediate. S. D. O. Sadar. please take immediate action in this case and let me know". The Sub-Divisional Magistrate ordered the Sub-Inspector of Manjhi Police Station to seize the grains and institute a case. Accordingly a case was instituted and after completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against these two petitioners under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act for contravention of Clause 3 of the Imported Food Grains Order. Cognizance was taken and the petitioners were put on trial. The defence was that the petitioners were falsely implicated due to enmity.

(3.) The trial court found the prosecution story to be correct. It held that the two petitioners were in conscious possession of the imported wheat and they were not able to explain such possession. Accordingly the learned Magistrate found both the accused guilty of the offence charged with and sentenced Satyadeo Sah to undergo rigorous imprisonment for eight months and Sukhdeo Singh to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The order was upheld on appeal. Hence these revisions have been filed.