STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. KESAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal under Sec. 378(iii) & (i) Cr.P.C. against the judgment and order dt. 22.1.1990 passed by the Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Merta, vide which, the accused respondent has been acquitted for the offence under Sec. 16/ 54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act. The facts in short are that the Excise Inspector, Merta Road filed a complaint against the accused Kesar Singh son of Shri Shyam Singh, by caste Rajput resident of Paliyas Post Padukalan, in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Merta on 8.6.87 under Sec. 16/ 54 of the Excise Act. It was alleged in that complaint that the accused was found in possession of 30 litres of fermented liquor in his own house and thus, he has committed offence under Sec. 16/ 54(a) and 54(d) of the Excise Act. On 31.7.1987, charges under Sec. 16/ 54(a) and (d) were framed and the accused denied the charge and claimed trial. The trial Court recorded the prosecution evidence. The prosecution examined PW/1 Bajrang Singh, PW/2 Sharwan Singh, PW 3 Nathuram, PW/4 Surendra Singh, PW/5 Bhanwar Lai and PW/6 Bheruram and Exhibited certain documents as Ex.P/1 to P/8. Thereafter, the statements of the accused under Sec. 313 were recorded and DW -1 Amar Singh was examined. After hearing the prosecution and the defence, the learned trial Judge has acquitted the accused respondent for the offence charged with.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the State while praying for setting aside the said order submitted that the evidence of PW -6 Bheru Ram -Excise Inspector was sufficient to convict the accused respondent. The order of acquittal was passed in the year 1990. 22 years have passed since then. Learned counsel for the State has not been able to point out as to how the statement of PW -6 was sufficient itself to convict the respondent especially when no other witness has supported or corroborated the statement of PW -6. Admittedly, all the witnesses have turned hostile. No other ground was raised.