Digitally signed by 2026:CGHC:7617 PRAKASH PRAKASH KUMAR KUMAR Date: NAFR

2026.02.12

15:26:58 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Criminal Revision No.1042 of 2016  Preetam Singh Netam, S/o Shri Mansai Netam, aged about 45 years, R/o Village Amlipara (Kochwahi), P.S. – Gurur, District – Balod, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant Versus  State of Chhattisgarh Through : Excise Circle Balod, District – Balod, Chhattisgarh ---- Non-applicant/Respondent For Applicant : Shri Mayank Mulchandani, Advocate on behalf of Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate, For State/Respondent : Shri Atanu Ghosh, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawa l Judgment on Board

11/02/2026 Heard.

1. The present revision filed under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 02.11.2016 passed in Criminal Appeal No.48/2016 by the 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Balod, District - Balod (C.G.), whereby judgment dated 05.05.2016 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balod, District – Balod (C.G.) in Criminal Case No.1473/2015 has been affirmed by the learned Appellate Court wherein the applicant has been convicted under Sections 36-A/45, 34(1)(a) and 34(1)(f) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 and sentenced R.I. for 1 year & fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, additional S.I. for 1 month; R.I. for 1 year & fine of Rs.20,000/-, in default, additional S.I. for two months; R.I. for 1 year & fine of Rs.20,000/-, in default, additional S.I. for two months, respectively. All the sentences are directed to run concurrently.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 21.09.2015, the Investigating Officer, Excise Sub-Inspector Umesh Agrawal, received information through mobile phone that in village Amlipara, Kochwahi, the applicant/accused Preetam Singh had illegally prepared and stored mahua liquor. Acting upon this information, the Investigating Officer, without obtaining a search warrant, proceeded to the spot along with his staff. In the presence of witnesses, he first conducted personal search of himself, the staff, and the vehicle. Thereafter, when the house premises of the applicant/accused was searched, the accused was caught red-handed while providing mahua liquor for drinking to two persons, namely Mannalal and Shankar Kunjam, inside his house. Further, from the house premises a white, muddy-colored plastic jerrycan containing 2.5 bulk litres of illicit mahua liquor prepared by hand-distillation, along with one pot/Handi used for preparing liquor, was recovered and seized, thereafter, following the necessary procedure, the offence was registered against the applicant.

3. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balod, District - Balod. The applicant abjured the guilt and pleaded innocence. So as to prove the guilt of the accused/applicant, the prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses. Statement of the accused/applicant was also recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.

4. Learned trial Court, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, convicted and sentenced the accused-applicant. The said judgment was challenged by the accused in criminal appeal, however, the Appellate Court, vide judgment dated 02.11.2016 affirmed the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court. Hence, this revision.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the Trial Court as well as the Appellate Court, without properly appreciating the evidence available on record, were not justified in convicting and sentencing the applicant for the aforesaid offences. He further submits that there are material contradictions and omissions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses and their statements do not corroborate with each other. He further submits that as per the statement of independent witness Banshilal (PW-01), he has signed in blank papers (Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-6). Furthermore, the prosecution has failed to prove that the ho