JUDGMENT - H.W. DHABE, J.:---This is an appeal by the State against the acquittal of the respondent-accused, who was charged with the offence under sections 66(1)(b) and 85(1) of the Bombay Prohibition Act. According to the prosecution, the respondent-accused went to the Dipali Lodge at about 6 p.m. on 4-8-1984 and rented cot therein entering his name himself in the Lodge Register. However, thereafter he immediately left the lodge and came to the Lodge again at about 8.30 p.m. The Manager of the Lodge Kautik Baburao Lokhande found that the respondent-accused was smelling of and was under the influence of alcohol and was not in a position to talk properly.

2. According to the prosecution, the accused again went away in the drunken condition and came to the Lodge at about 10 or 11 P.M. The Manager of the Lodge asked him to go to his bed. However, at about 1.30 or 1.45 A.M. on 5-8-1984. i.e. during the night hours, the accused got up and started shouting by sitting on the cot itself. He also started abusing the Manager Kautik (P.W. 2). Since the accused was disturbing other customers in the Hotel, the Manager tried to pacify him. He also talked with the police on phone. The acc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document