HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SB: HON’BLE SHRI R.N. CHANDRAKARJ, J Criminal Aggeal No. 333 of 2001 State of Chhattisgarh Aggellant Vs.’ Mohanlal Resgondents Q POST FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT g, -7-2009 L / J Sdl- - RN. Chandrakafy S‘i:;_ ‘ Judge u x ~ gnaw ’ i ‘54 ] HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No. 333 of 2901 APPELLANT State of Chhattisgarh Versus RESPONDENT Mohanlal, S/o. Tikaram Patel, aged about 28 years, resident of Telikot, Kharsia, Dist. Raigarh. (Application under Section 377 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) SB: Hon’ble Mr. Ranganath Chandrakar, J. Present: Shri A.V. Shridhar, Panel Lawyerforthe appellant/State. Shri S.R.J. Jaiswal, counsei for the respondent. F\ JUDGMENT (Delivered on QHUIy, 2009) 1. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the State for enhancement of sentence awarded to the respondent/accused for offence punishable under Section 36 of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 (for short, “the Act, 1915”) against the order dated 22—1-2001 passed in Criminal Case No. 26 of 2001 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raigarh, whereby the accused'was convicted and sentenced till rising of the court and to pay a fine of Rs.5/—, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo S.l for one day. 2. Brief facts are that on 13-1—2001 during patrolling the police caught and arrested one Mohanlal, resident of village Telikot, who was illegally carrying one litre of country made liquor. The case was tried summarily. The accused admitted his guilt and was convicted and sentenced as .\\\_\ wed in para 1 ofthejudgment. Hence, this appeal. m @ hiwm N m ;m3 ma .. Raiu Learned counsel appearing for the the accused/ respondent x sentence awarded and fine imposed upon Section 36 of the Act, 1915 is inadequate. Looking to the intensity j t under iiquor.’the respondent/accused was not entitied for a lesser ‘ the iiiegai punishment. for the respondent argued in oppugnation. learned counsel appearing matter in support of the judgment and finding arrived at by the trial the court. heard learned counsel for the parties, l have perused the entire Having record of the trial court. Section 36 of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 reads as under:— possession.— Whoever, “36. without Penalty lawful authority, for intoxicant illegal has knowing in his the possession same to have any «a quantity been manufactured. of " unlawfully any cultivated have imported, or been collected paid thereon, knowing transported, shall the t’ prescribed duty not to for a term which be punishable with imprisonment s or with fine which may may extend extend to one to thousand six mon rupees, or with both.“ 6. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, i am of the that the learned trial Court has rightly awarded the considered opinion sentence and fine amount in accordance with the provisions of Section the Act, 1915 and l do not find any illegality or infirmity in the 36- of judgment and finding of the trial Court. Thus, no interference is called for the iudgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial in Court. discussions, the appeal deserves to be and is 7. in view of the foregoing MM [ SM / hereby dismissed. I 1 RN. Chandraka“ L Judge ”1‘ it, V .;“C a . ,