UTTAM CHAND Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, Uttam Chand, has an extensive business in excise shops, of which lie holds a considerable number in nine districts of this province, including a gania shop at Koilwar, in the district of Arrah. His Koilwar servant, Lakhichand, was convicted, under Section 46 of the Bengal Excise Act (V of 1909), for being in possession of 2 1/2 seers of ganja which lie was attempting to transport from Arrah district to Bindhyachal. Lakhichand confessed his guilt.

(2.) The question now is whether the conviction of the petitioner, the master of Lakhichand, can be supported on the language of Section 56 of the Act. The section is as follows: "When any offence punishable under Section 46 is committed, by any person in the employ and acting on. behalf of the holder of a license granted, under this Act, such holder shall also be punishable as if he himself had committed, the offence, unless he establishes that all due and reasonable precautions were exercised by him to prevent the commission of such offence."

(3.) In the opinion of the convicting Magistrate, the petitioner has so many servants and so much business to attend to, that it was due to laxity of supervision on his part that his servant Lakhichand was able to leave his Koilwar shop and commence travelling to Bindhyachal with 2 1/2 seers of gania.