##PAGE1##

1

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

CRR No. 1024 of 2016 ORDER RESERVED ON 19.03.2026

PRONOUNCED ON 01.04.2026 Virendra Paras S/o Khemlal Paras Aged About 40 Years R/o Village

Sambalpur, Thana Arjuni, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant Digitally versus signed by ALLENA ANJANI

KUMAR State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Thana- Arjuni, District Date:

2026.04.01

15:50:25 Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent +0530 For Applicant :Shri Ashwell Franklin appears on behalf of Shri

Samir Singh, Advocate.

For Respondent/State :Shri Atanu Ghosh, Deputy Government Advocate.

(HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL)

CAV Order

1. The present revision filed under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.10.2016 passed in Criminal Appeal No.53/2016 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dhamtari (C.G.), whereby the appeal filed by the applicant is dismissed and affirmed the conviction of the applicant/accused under Section 34 (1)(a) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 and the sentence of S.I. for six months with fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to pay fine amount, to further undergo SI for three months as passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dhamtari in

Criminal Case No.1066/2015 vide its judgment dated 30.04.2016.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 18.10.2015, when the P.S.I. Satyam Chouhan (P.W.4) of Police Station Dhamtari along with Constables No.620, 708 & 570 was on patrolling duty, at that time, he received

2

information from the informer that the applicant is involved in selling liquor illegally and kept the same near village Arjujni turn. On receipt of such information, he rushed to the spot along with staff and laid a siege and caught the applicant possessing 20 quarters Goa whiskey kept in white carton in a plastic bag, then P.W.4 Satyam Singh Chouhan served a notice under Section 91 Cr.P.C. to the applicant, thereupon the applicant could not produce any documents. Thereafter, P.W.4 Satyam Singh Chouhan seized the carton containing 20 quarter bottles of liquor vide Ex.P.2 before the witnesses. The seized article was sent for chemical examination and upon examination, vide

Ex.P.7 it was found to be whiskey.

3. After completion of investigation, charge sheet under Section 34 (a) was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhamtari. The applicant abjured his guilt and pleaded innocence. So as to prove the guilt of the accused/applicant, the prosecution has examined as many as 5 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 applicant and the said judgment was appealed in Appellate Court and the Appellate Court affirmed the said

judgment as mentioned in opening paragraph. Hence, this revision.

5. Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the prosecution has failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. He would further submit that the conviction of the applicant recorded by both the trial Court and the appellate Court under Section 34 (1) (a) of the Excise Act is erroneous. He would next contend that even P.W.1 Constable Yuvaraj Thakur has not stated anywhere about the place where the alleged incident happened and that, the other prosecution witnesses have also not properly

3

supported the case of the prosecution. He would also submit that the prosecution has also not been able to show as to where the seized article was kept in safe custody after seizure proceedings are completed by it. It would also submit by him that no Malkhana register was produced before the Court nor any person, who kept the seized article, has been examined by the prosecution. He would also contend that there are contradictions and omissions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. Learned counsel for the applicant has also pressed this revision on additiona