##PAGE1##

1

2026:CGHC:16290 NAFR

Digitally signed by HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PRAKASH PRAKASH KUMAR

KUMAR Date:

2026.04.09

14:54:38 +0530 CRR No. 1048 of 2016

Sanjay Banjare S/o Manrakhan Banjare, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Nagadadih Police Station Chakarbhatha, District Bilaspur,

Chhattisgarh, ... Applicant

versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Chakarbhatha, District

Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, ... Respondent

For Applicant : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Suresh Tandon, P.L.

Hon’ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal,

Order on Board

09/04/2026 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 09.11.2016 passed in Criminal Appeal No.155/2015 by the Sessions Judge, Sessions Division, District – Bilaspur (C.G.), whereby judgment dated 01.10.2015 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) in Criminal Case No.7283/2015 has been affirmed by the learned Appellate Court

2

wherein the applicant has been convicted under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 and sentenced R.I. for 2 years & fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default of payment of fine, additional R.I.

for 6 month.

2. According to the prosecution, on 21.07.2015, during routine

patrolling duty, Excise Sub-Inspector Nidhish Koshti (PW-03) received secret information and conducted a search of the accused’s poultry farm in the presence of witnesses Jagdish (PW- 01) and Ajay (PW-02). During the search, 150 bulk liters of Mahua made country liquor and 2000 kilograms of Mahua Lahan were recovered from the poultry farm. Thereafter, the Excise Sub- Inspector seized the recovered liquor and mahua lahan in the presence of the witnesses and prepared a seizure memo (Exhibit P-5) and prepared spot map (Ex.P-7). Thereafter, offence was registered against the accused/applicant under the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915, and he was arrested, subsequently, statements

of the witnesses were recorded.

3. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before

the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, District - Bilaspur. 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 3 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

3

said judgment was challenged by the accused in criminal appeal, however, the Appellate Court, vide judgment dated 09.11.2016 affirmed the 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 offence. 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, this apart, both the seizure witnesses have turned hostile. It is further contended that there is no evidence available on record which could show that the seized property was kept in “sealed” condition nor sample seal is affixed in the seizure memo. As such, the prosecution has failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. On these premises, it is prayed by counsel for the applicant that applicant be acquitted from the offences leveled against him. In support of his arguments, he placed his reliance upon a decision rendered in the matter of Suresh Kumar vs. State of Chhattisgarh reported in 2006 (3) CGLJ 259. Lastly, he submits that the fine amount has

already been deposited before the trial Court by the applicant.

6. On the contrary, learned State Counsel, while supporting the

impugned judgments, submits that the lear