BEHRAMSHA RATANJI Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We are mush obliged to the Government Pleader in this case for the pains he has taken to make us acquainted with the prosecution view of the matter. He was not originally instructed to appear, but the Magistrate s judgment presented so much difficulty to us that we asked him to look into the papers of the case and put before us the case for the prosecution.

(2.) That case appears to be this: Accused No. 1, who is a trader in Ahmedabad, finding that the price of petrol had risen in February 1918 and being anxious to make a profit out of this rise in price, took to dealing in petrol. He had himself no license either for the import or transport or possession of petrol. So he entered into an arrangement with Cama Brothers, of whom accused No. 2 is a representative, that they were to receive for him and store for him the petrol that was sent to Ahmedabad to his name. Thereafter he sold some petrol of his that was in the custody or possession of Cama Brothers, He also imported from Rajkot eleven drums which were sent covered by a railway receipt in the name of accused No. 1 s firm which was taken possession of in Ahmedabad and stored by Cama Brothers. He also transported in a similar way a quantity of petrol from Ranpur to Ahmedabad. It is quite immaterial for the purposes of the point which we have to consider to trouble either about the quantities or the dates. It suffices for our purpose to assume that the transport and import by accused No. 1 was contrary to the provisions of the Petroleum Act.

(3.) All the three accused were tried by the First Class Magistrate in Ahmedabad, accused No. 1 for the commission* of the offences of transporting, importing and possessing without a license and accused Nos. 2 and 3 for abetting him in so doing. They were all convicted. The sentence inflicted on accused No. 1 was an appealable sentence. He has appealed and his appeal is still pending before the Sessions Judge of Ahmedabad. The sentences inflicted on accused Nos. 2 and 3 were not appealable. So they have applied to us in our revisional capacity to set aside the sentences.