IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.A No.518 of 2002 Date of decision : April 20, 2009 State of H.P. …Appellant. Versus Narinder Paul and others …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellant : Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Assistant Advocate General. For the Respondents : Ms Sumeet Kaur, Advocate. Surjit Singh, J ( Oral ) State has appealed against the judgment, dated 30th January, 2002, of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, whereby respondents, Narinder Paul and Lachman Singh, driver and conductor, respectively, of truck No.HRA-1378, who were tried for offence, punishable under Section 61(1)(a) of the Punjab Excise Act as applicable to the State of Himachal Pradesh, have been acquitted. 2. Prosecution’s case is that on 29th July, 1994, truck No. HRA-1378, loaded with 300 cartons of Black Stallion Whisky (Indian Made Foreign Liquor), was intercepted at Boileauganj barrier, by the Constables on duty (at the said barrier) and they informed Police Station Boileauganj, from where HC Gangbir Singh was deputed. HC Gangbir Singh (PW-6) asked the respondents to produce the papers in respect of the liquor loaded in the truck. They produced a Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… permit on Form L-32 alongwith Challan Ex. P-2 and Pass on Form L-34 Ex. P-3. As per the permit and the pass, Ex. P-1 and Ex. P-3, respectively, the liquor was dispatched from Parwanoo for delivery to M/s Sun Rise Enterprises, Tara Devi. When the truck was intercepted, it was going from Shimla to Tara Devi, though Tara Devi is a place between Parwanoo and Shimla and as such there was no occasion for the truck loaded with Whisky to have come to Shimla. Therefore, a case was registered against the respondents. Investigation was conducted and ultimately the respondents were challaned. 3. During the course of trial, respondents did not deny that they were carrying 300 cartons of Whisky in the truck and that their truck was intercepted at Boileauganj barrier. They took the plea that they came towards Shimla side from Parwanoo, for the first time and so they were not aware of the location of Tara Devi and it was because of this reason that they happened to reach Shimla and that when on reaching Shimla they realized that Tara Devi had been left behind they made enquiries at the Boileauganj barrier and when they were making the enquiries their truck was checked. 4. Learned trial Court has believed the defence version and acquitted the respondents. 5. I have heard the learned Assistant Advocate General as also the learned counsel for the respondents and gone through the record. 6. A reading of atleast one of the three papers, which the respondents were possessing, at the time of the …3… interception of the truck, not only probabilizes the defence plea, but rather proves it. This document (Ex. P-2) is the challan issued by the transporter. In this challan initially the destination to which the consignment was to be taken is written as Shimla. The document is a carbon copy. Word “Tara Devi” has been written subsequently in this document, within brackets, in pen. It is not clear as to when this word was written and by whom. However, the fact remains that initially the name of the place to which the consignment was to be carried was written as Shimla. Not only this, the consignee was also named as Sun Rise Enterprises, Shimla. As per this challan, liquor was loaded on 28th July, 1994. Truck was intercepted on the next following morning at 8.50 at Boileauganj barrier, which is at a distance of 3-4 kms. from Tara Devi. In view of the abovestated position, I do not think the trial Magistrate has committed any irregularity, leave alone a serious illegality, in passing the judgment of acquittal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. April 20, 2009(sd) ( Surjit Singh ), J