Non-compliance with mandatory provisions of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, lack of conclusive evidence, and doubts regarding witness testimony can invalidate a prosecution and lead to acquittal.

1. This Criminal Revision is directed against the judgment dated 16-022006 delivered by the learned Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon in Criminal Appeal No.04/2005, affirming the judgment dated 13-01-2005 delivered by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rajnandgaon in Criminal Case No.1 587/2004 whereby the applicant herein was convicted under Section- 34(1)(a) of Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 1915 (hereinafter referred to as the" Act") and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for I year and fine of Rs.25,000/-.

2. The factual matrix in brief is that on 26-08-2004 upon receiving a secret information that the applicant herein was in possession of illicit country made liquor, PW-2 Excise Sub Inspector K.R. Taram Circle-B, Rajnandgaon, without obtaining a search warrant for want of time, proceeded to the spot and intercepted the applicant herein on Khairagarh Road, Rajnandgaon and seized 30 liters country made liquor made from Mahua from the possession of the appellant in a black coloured Jerrican. Shri K.L. Taram PW-2 examined the contents of the Jerrican by smelling, tasting and by performing litmus test and found that it was country made liquor, 30 bulk liters of country made liquor contained in a Jerrican was seized in presence of witnesses lshwar PW -1 and Neeraj Shrivastava PW 3. The applicant was prosecuted for the offences punishable under Section-34(1)(a) of C.G. Excise Act.

3. The appellant abjured the guilt. The prosecution examined Excise Sub Inspector K.L. Taram PW -2 and independent witness Ishwar Prasad PW -1 and Neeraj Shrivastava PW-3. No evidence was led in defence. Relying upon the testimony of Excise Sub Inspector K.L. Taram PW -2 which was supported by Neeraj Shrivastava PW -3 in material particulars, learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid in para-1. Appeal preferred by the applicant herein was dismissed by the impugned judgment delivered by learned Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon as shown in para-1.

4. Shri S.C. Verma, learned counsel for the applicant has pressed this revision only on the ground of non-compliance of Section-57 and 57-A of Act. It was contended that non-compliance of Section-57 and 57-A of the Act vitiates the prosecution. Reliance was placed on a decision of this Court rendered in Santosh and Another Vs. State of Chhattisgarh in Criminal Revision No.273/ 2005 decided on 29-09-2005 and Dubin Ram Vs. State of Chhattisgarh in Criminal Revision No. 156/2005 decided on 30-09-2005 wherein it was held that non-compliance of provision of Section-57 and 57-A of the Act vitiates the prosecution. On the other hand, Shri Ashish Shukla, learned Govt. Advocate argued in support of the impugned judgment.

5. The only point which thus requires consideration in this Criminal Revision is whether there is non-compliance of Section-57 and 57-A of the Act by the Excise Sub Inspector Shri KL. Taram PW -2 after effecting the seizure of 30 bulk liters of country made liquor from the possession of the applicant herein.

6. Section-57 and 57-A of the Act read as under:-

Section-57. Report by Excise Officer - Where any Excise Officer below the rank of Collector makes any arrest, seizure or search under this Act, he shall, within twenty-four hours thereafter, make a full report of all the particulars of the arrest, seizure or search to his immediate official superior, and shall, unless bail be accepted under section 59, take or send the person arrested, or the thing seized, with all convenient dispatch, to a Judicial Magistrate for trial or adjudication.

Section-57-A. Police to take charge of articles seized - An officer in charge of a police station shall take charge of and keep in safe custody pending the orders of a magistrate or an Excise Officer, all articles seized under this Act which may be delivered to him, and shall allow any Excise Officer who may accompany such articles to the police station, or who may be deputed for the purpose by his superior officer, to affix his