The defence was that these articles were number in their possession or in the godown in charge of the appellant.
This appeal is before us by special leave.
1000 against the decision of the Presidency Magistrate, an appeal was filed in the High Court but was summarily dismissed.
P. W. 3 also described the godown as the godown of the appellant.
He was also number questioned on this point.
As the appellant admitted that he was in charge of the godown, further evidence was number led on the point.
Mahajan, J. The appellant along with one Kishenchand was charged under Section 66 b read with Section 81, Bombay Prohibition Act, 25 of 1949, on the allegation that on 8 6 1950 the two accused were found in possession of twenty gallons and eight drums of rectified spirit without a permit as required by law.
