Crl.A.No.617-SBA of 1997 1
In the Punjab and Haryana High Court,at Chandigarh.
Decided on August 04,2009
State of Haryana --Appellant
Vs.
Sanjay and another -- Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
Present: Mr.Partap Singh,Sr.DAG,Haryana, for the
appellant/State.
Mr.Vikas Bishnoi,Advocate,for the respondents.
Rakesh Kumar Jain,J: (Oral)
This appeal has been filed by the State of Haryana,
against the order of learned Special Judge, Jind, dated 21.1.1997,
vide which the respondents were acquitted of the charges framed
against them under Sections 406/420 IPC and 7/10/55 of Essential
Commodities Act, 1955, for violating the provisions of Rules of
Control Order of Liquified Petroleum Gas (Regulated Supplies and
Distribution) Rules, 1993.
The story unfolded by the prosecution is that on
01.7.1996, Bhim singh SI/SHO of Police Station, Julana was on
patrol duty alongwith other police officials near Octroi Post,
Deorar Road, Julana. At about 11.30 PM, they noticed a truck
parked near the Octroi Post. One person was standing on the top of
Crl.A.No.617-SBA of 1997 2
the truck and another person was standing near it alongwith three
persons having three empty cylinders with them. All the three
persons on seeing the police party ran away from the spot. The truck
was taken into possession alongwith 324 cylinders which
included 319 filled gas cylinders, five empty cylinders and three
more empty cylinders vide memo Ex.PE duly attested by constable
Mohinder Singh and Tika Ram Pws. The respondents were arrested
at the spot. Respondent Sanjay produced Rs.700/-,one challan-cum-
invoice Ex.PA, one return voucher Ex.PB and cash memo Ex.PC
which were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PD duly attested by
the aforesaid witnesses. Similarly, accused/respondent Sanjay also
produced one registration certificate and the driving license which
were also taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex.PJ.
Thereafter, both the respondents suffered disclosure statements
Ex.PL and Ex.PK respectively to the effect that they could get
recovered the cylinders sold in black. The Investigating Officer sent
ruqa Ex.PM for registration of the case on the basis of which formal
FIR Ex.PM/1 was recorded by Satpal ASI, who made endorsement
Ex. PM/2 on the ruqa. He also prepared visual site plan Ex.PN of
the place of recovery with its correct marginal notes and recorded the
statements of the witnesses. On completion of investigation, report
under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was prepared and submitted to the Court
for trial of the accused/respondents.
In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution
examined PW-1 Dharam Pal, PW2- Tikka Ram, PW-3 Rattan Lal ,
PW-4 Suresh Kumar, PW-5 Mohinder Singh and PW-6 Bhim Singh
Crl.A.No.617-SBA of 1997 3
SI/SHO.
No independent witness was associated by the
Investigating Officer. Even the testimonies of the police officials
was also silent in respect of the fact that the accused/respondents
were selling the gas cylinders in black. Thus, the learned Court
below found that the prosecution has failed to prove on record that
the respondents/accused have violated any Rules of Control Order
of Liquified Petroleum Gas (Regulated Supplies and Distribution)
Rules, 1993. In fact, none of the prosecution witnesses had
supported the case of the prosecution. Therefore, giving the benefit
of doubt to the respondents/accused, they were acquitted of the
charges framed against them.
Mr.Partap Singh, learned Senior Deputy Advocate
General, appearing on behalf of the appellant/State, could not point
any infirmity in the order of the learned Special Judge, Jind.
In view of the above, I do not find any merit in this
appeal and the same is hereby dismissed.
Aug 04,2009 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge