ANIA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Ania has been convicted under Section 66(l)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act (here in after called' the Act') and sentence to one year's RI and a fine of Rs. 1,000/ - in default of payment of fine to further R1 of three months by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Abu Road, by his judgment dated 7 -1 -1981. His appeal has been dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirohi, on 5 -11 -1984. He has filed this revision through jail.

(2.) I have heard Mr. Harish Mathur as Amicus Curiae and the learned Public Prosecutor and have gone through the record.

(3.) TWO contentions have been raised before me by the learned Amicus Curiae. His first contention is that recovery of the liquor is not proved in as much as the motbirs have not supported the prosecution story and the courts below should not have relied on the partisan evidence of the excise officials. His second contention is that the courts below have taken it to be a case of third offence and have accordingly, sentenced the petitioner of punishment under Section 66 of the Act but as a matter of fact, there is absolutely no evidence nor even a challan of its being a third offence and, therefore, the sentence awarded to the petitioner is certainly uncalled for.