Prosecution must prove that liquor was consumed in prohibited areas to sustain convictions under the Bombay Prohibition Act.

1. Common questions of law and fact arise in all these three revision petitions and hence, they are being disposed of by this judgment.

2. In Criminal Revision Application No. 464 of 1966, petitioner Chhaganji was prosecuted for offences punishable under S.85(1) (3) and 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 , which will be hereinafter referred to as the Act.

3. The prosecution story was that on 13th March, 1966 at about 1-30 p.m. the petitioner was found drunk near the hospital in a public place in Deesa town, district Banaskantha and he had also consumed liquor without a pass or permit. Learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mr. N. G. Butala, in that Criminal Case No. 380, found that the petitioner was not found under the influence of drink. He was not found intoxicated. He, therefore, acquitted him of the offence under S.85(1) (3) of the Act. He further found that the petitioner had consumed liquor without pass or permit. In view of that finding of his, he convicted him of an offence punishable under S. 66(1)(b) of the Act and sentenced him to suffer three months' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo one and a half months' further rigorous imprisonment. Against that order of conviction and sentence recorded against the petitioner, the petitioner filed Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 1966 in Sessions Court, Banaskantha District at Palanpur. Learned Sessions Judge, Palanpur, Mr. M. I. Pandya, who heard that appeal, dismissed it, upholding the order of conviction and sentence. Against that order, this revision application has been filed by the petitioner in this Court.

4. In Revision Application No. 465 of 1966, the petitioner was prosecuted for offences punishable under S.85(1) (3) and 66(1)(b) of the Act. The prosecution story was that the petitioner was found drunk in a public place at Kumbhar Vas in Deesa town, District Banaskantha, on 17th April, 1966 at 7-30 p.m. and he had further consumed liquor without pass or permit. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, in that Criminal Case No. 381 of 1966, found that the petitioner was not found drunk. He was not intoxicated. He found that he had consumed liquor without pass or permit. He, therefore, acquitted the petitioner of the offence punishable under S.85(1) (3) of the Act and convicted him of the offence punishable under S.66(1)(b) of the Act, and sentenced him to suffer three months' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo one and a half months' further rigorous imprisonment. Against the order of conviction and sentence, the petitioner filed Criminal Appeal No. 37 of 1966 in the Court of Sessions Judge, Banaskantha District at Palanpur. The learned Sessions Judge who heard that appeal, dismissed that appeal, confirming the order of conviction and sentence passed against the petitioner. The petitioner has, therefore, filed the present revision petition in this Court.

5. In Criminal Revision Application No. 466 of 1966, the petitioner was prosecuted for offences under S.85(1)(1), S.85(1) (3) and 66(1)(b) of the Act. The prosecution story was that on 19th April, 1966, at about 9-30 p.m., the petitioner was found drunk near the old S. T. Bus stand in a public place in Deesa town, District Banaskantha. He was unable to take care of himself. He had consumed liquor without pass or permit. The learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Deesa, in that Criminal Case No. 441 of 1966, convicted the petitioner of offences punishable under S.85(1)(1) and S.85(1) (3) of the Act and sentenced him to suffer seven days' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 25/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo seven days' further rigorous imprisonment. He also convicted the petitioner of an offence punishable under S.66(1)(b) of the Act and sentenced him to suffer three months' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of f