STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. INDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been moved under section 378 (3), Cr. P. C, 1973 against the judgment of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barmer dated June 23, 1987 by which he acquitted the accused-respondent under Section 10, Rajasthan Requisitioning of Goods Vehicles Act, 1969 (herein-after referred to as 'the Act' ). The facts of the case giving rise to this petition may be summarised thus.

(2.) ON 18. 4. 1986, requisition order Ex. D/2 was issued by the District Magistrate, Barmer to Dhanji s/o Uttam Singh Rajpoot r/o Lachhmi Nagar, Barmer, owner of the heavy vehicle No. RJC 363, under Sec. 3 (2) of the Act directing him to produce the said vehicle before him on the same day. It was served upon the accused Inder Singh. ON his failure to produce the vehicle, report Ex. P/2 was sent to the Station House Officer, Barmer. Thereon, a case under Section 10 of the Act was registered. After investigation, a challan under this Section was filed against the accused-respondent Indersingh in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barmer. The particulars of the offence were explained to him. He did not plead guilty. The prosecution examined Assistant Collector and Magistrate, Bermar, Shri Budhram Meena P. W. 1, L. D. C. of the Collecto-rate Barmer, Maghraj PW2, and District Transport Officer, Barmer, Shri Gopal-dan P W. 3. The accused denied all the allegations of the prosecution story in his examination under Sec. 313, Cr. P. C. After hearing the parties, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitted the accused on the grounds that no order under Sec. 3 (2) of the Act was addressed to him and the procedure adopted by the District Magistrate, Barmer while issuing the order Ex. D/2 was against the provisions of the Act.

(3.) IT may also be mentioned here that order Ex. D/1 dated 29. 4. 86 issued by the Tehsildar, Barmer has been filed by the accused. IT shows that the said vehicle RJC 363 was released by him with effect from April 25, 1986. When the said vehicle was already requisitioned and was in possession of the Tehsildar, Barmer, it could not be requisitioned by the District Magistrate Barmer.