9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 531X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as introduced by the Act 36 of 1973. That omission cannot be treated as material in the light of Section 464 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In this case, by going through the charge, it can be seen that the details of the allegation for which, he is facing the trial is made clear. When the charge is clear regarding the allegations, quoting of the offences or omission of quoting the sub-section will not vitiate the trial. The Court below awarded a minimum sentence of six months and to pay a fine of ₹ 20,000/- with default simple imprisonment for three months - Considering the fact that the age of the revision petitioner who is accused No. 1. was given as 53 in the judgment and the case is that of the year 1990 and now we are in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Sessions Court was also not successful. Hence this Criminal Revision Petition. 2. When this Criminal Revision Petition came up for hearing, the Learned Counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted before me that the appreciation of the evidence by the Court below can be only termed as perverse. It is also the submission of the Learned Counsel that, it can be seen that he was found guilty under Section 9(1) and (2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. Actually, there is no such section for which conviction can be passed. It is also the submission that the entire proceedings against the petitioner is vitiated by grave irregularity from the point of trial of framing the charge. It is the submission that there was no ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e has been a gross violation of the principles of natural justice, as the charge under which the petitioner has been convicted has not been read over to him. Hence, the whole proceedings will vitiate. 4. I heard the Learned Public Prosecutor. 5. The Learned Public Prosecutor submitted before this Court that, here is a case, where, two Courts below appreciated the evidence. The first time, the revision petitioner is raising prejudice in respect of the charge. It is the submission that Section 464 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is specific regarding such omission to frame or absence or error in charge. This is a case, which will come under the purview of Section 464(1) and not one under Section 464(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cers in the presence of 1st accused and witnesses. 20,400 labelled beedies and 4,200 unlabelled beedies were found in the premises as against the closing stock of 16,500 labelled beedies and 10,000 unlabelled beedies on 24-1-87. It was also the further case that behind the Fakri Beedi Company, there was a locked room, the owner K.P. Hamsa was summoned and in the presence of the revision petitioner herein, the said room was opened. When the said room was examined, it contained beedi and beedi labels. 44,300 beedi bundles affixed with the Fakeer Beedi labels 4,80,300 unlabelled beedi in newspaper bundles also found therein. Thus, altogether 4,62,620 beedies were found. 7. A show cause notice was issued to both the accused, who are the owne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o illegality or perversity seen committed by the Courts below. But, at the very same time, the revision petitioner got a case that charge was not proper. The Court charge was as follows :- That you, A1, engaged in the manufacture of beedies under licence No. L4.104/75 in the brand name of Fakir Beedi at your factory at Koppam, Palghat District during July, 1982 to January, 1987 stored unmanufactured tobacco for the manufacture of beedies without proper accounting at your above said factory and collection centres at Keecheri, Trichur District and removed 6,12,49,910 beedies manufactured by you, from your factory and collection centres without payment of excise duty and without proper accounting and also without proper transport documen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elief, the burden of proving which shall be upon him, that the information supplied by him is true) supplies false information; (d) attempts to commit or abets the commission of, any of the offences mentioned in clauses (a) and (b) of this section; shall be punishable,- (i) in the case of an offence relating to any excisable goods, the duty leviable thereon under this Act exceeds one lakh of rupees, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years and with fine : Provided that in the absence of special and adequate reasons to the contrary to be recorded in the judgment of the Court such imprisonment shall not be for a term of less than six months; (ii) in any other case, with imprisonment for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
