LAWS(PVC)-1912-11-13

BIRJRAJ MARWARI Vs. EMPEROR

Decided On November 12, 1912
BIRJRAJ MARWARI Appellant
V/S
EMPEROR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard and carefully considered the arguments addressed to us by learned Counsel on either side and the evidence on the record, we are of opinion that the facts proved are not sufficient to support the conviction of the petitioner for an offence to cheat.

(2.) Octroi is charged upon certain goods brought into the Sambulpur Municipality. When dutiable goods are exported, a refund of the duty is allowed. The goods have to be presented in bulk at the Octroi out-post with an application for a pass in a prescribed form. In the ordinary course, the application is handed by the applicant or his agent to the out-post mohurir who makes it over to the daroga. It is the duty of the latter to check the applications and having done so to certify the description and quantity of the goods actually presented. The check has to be attested by a member of the Municipal Committee and in this connection the relevant portion of Rule (4) of part B of the supplementary rules for the refund of Octroi duty (dated 14th March 1910) may be quoted: A Municipal member must attest the check at the exit station out post.... In the absence of attestation, the exit mohurir shall not sign the chalan.

(3.) The importance of the exit mohurir s signature lies in the fact that when the check is complete, the chalan or pass is made oat by the daroga which has to be signed by the mohurir. Under Rule (1) of part A of the supplementary rules, above referred to, the absence of the mohurir s signature is one of the reasons for which an application for a refund should be rejected. Before refund is allowed, the railway receipt for the goods has also to be produced [Rule (2) of part A],