Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
Rahul Kumar S/o Parmeshwar Chaudhary – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ALOK KUMAR PANDEY, J.
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.06.2025 passed by Exclusive Special Excise Court No. 01, Supaul in S.T. Excise Case No. 586 of 2017 arising out of Kishanpur P.S. Case No. 64 of 2016, whereby and whereunder appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 47(a) of the BIHAR EXCISE ACT , 1915 and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years alongwith fine of Rs. 5,000/- for the said offence. In default of payment of fine, appellants have been further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months. The period undergone by the convicts in jail custody has been directed to be set off from the period of custody.
2. As per prosecution case, the informant, who is S.H.O. Kishnapur police station, recorded his self statement on 29.03.2016 that he proceeded on night patrolling at 10.30 P.M. alongwith other police officials. During patrolling, at around 02.00 A.M. he received secret information that huge quantity of illegal country made liquor was to cross through Singhiyawan Bazar. He alongwith police force reached at Singhiyawan Chowk at 02.15 A.M. It is alleged th
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and inconsistent witness testimony undermines the credibility of charges under the Bihar Excise Act.
The court ruled that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt due to procedural irregularities and witness credibility issues.
The conviction under the Chhattisgarh Excise Act was set aside due to prosecution's failure to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt based on procedural violations.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and failure to produce key evidence undermines the conviction.
Conviction for illicit liquor possession cannot be based solely on non-chemical tests; lack of adequate evidence warrants acquittal.
The prosecution must establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, adhering to statutory requirements; failure to do so results in acquittal.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
