3 to 6 when he was proceeding towards the temple after hearing the alarm at 8 P.M. that some goon das have entered the temple, and that subsequently PW 4 handed over one person to him and left the place and came back with the plastic packet companytaining some papers and produced it before him.
3 and 5 admitted having gone to Nayka along with accused Nos.
After receiving the reports Exs.
He directed that the taxi GTD 7555 be returned to the seventh accused and the truck GTD 4098 be sold and its sale proceeds to be companyfiscated to the Government.
After sending a messanger by the car to Ahmedabad for informing the Inspector General of Police about the occurrence and requesting to send an Inspector of Police for investigation, PW 12 seized the drums and certain other properties from the truck GTD 4098 under the Panchnama Ex.
PW 6 has stated in his evidence that all the four accused persons got down from the taxi and went into Nayka village.
He also saw one jeep and a car companying from Kaira side and proceeding towards Navgam.
5 with the truck GTD 4098 which was carrying prohibited liquor.
The case of the prosecution was this On 12.9.1970 in the evening Jayamalbhai Nakum PW 12 the then Deputy Superintendent of Police, State Traffic Department, Ahmedabad hereinafter referred to as PW 12 received information that the truck GTD 4098 carrying prohibited liquor was going to proceed from ttaroda to Ahmedabad and that Bhugdomal Accused No.
The prosecution relies also upon the evidence of PW 12 that when he was waiting at Kaira at about 8 P.M. on that day the truck GTD 4098 passed from Nadiad to Kaira towards the crossing, that when the police party signaled for the truck to stop, it was driven at full speed on Ahmedabad side on the national high way, that the taxi GTD 7555 got a jerk and halted there and that he instructed his men to stop the taxi and proceeded in his car behind the truck GTD 4098 for stopping it.
3 to 6 who were produced before him they told him that they companye to Nayka for a walk.
The prosecution further relies upon the evidence of Harishanker PW 11 of Ahmedabad and of PW 5 and other witnesses including PWs 12 and 18 to show that the papers said to have been recovered by PW 18 from PW 2 on 13.9.1970 under the panch nama Ex.
PW 12 numbericed the truck GTD 4098 passing from Nadiad to Kaira and going towards the crossing.
Vithal Bhalaof Nayka PW 6 who was sitting in the S.T. bus stand at Nayka at about 7 or 8 P.M. on that day saw four persons getting down from a taxi and going into Nayka village.
P.W. 12 took accused 3 to 7 and the taxi GTD 7555 to the place where the truck GTD 4098 was stopped earlier on the national highway leading to Ahmedabad.
5 when he was being taken to the Village Chora.
3 and 5 have number satisfactorily proved by the prosecution.
71 were thrown away by accused No.
The special leave granted to accused Nos.
P.W. 12 overtook the taxi when it was being driven by the seventh accused beyond Nayka and brought the taxi and the seventh accused to Nayka.
593 of 1973 against the acquittal of accused 3, 6 and 7 while Criminal Revision Application No.
Fateh Singh of Nayka PW 5 and others including Hasmukhlal PW 1 produced accused Nos.
4 and some others would be companying behind the truck in a taxi.
5 was the manager of the truck under Pesumal.
77, 109 and 153 of 1975 we are companycerned with accused Nos.
PW 2 informed PW 12 that the packet and papers had been thrown by accused Nos.
It has to be numbered that PW 18 has admitted in his evidence that PW 12 did hot tell him anything about the plastic packet and the papers mentioned in the panchnama Ex.
Two witnesses were examined on behalf of accused No.
PW 12 instructed the police jeep driver to stop and detain the taxi and followed the truck in the Imphala car and overtook the truck proceeding two furlongs away and asked the driver of the truck to stop it.
There is discrepency in the case of the prosecution about the seizure of the papers mentioned in the panchnama Ex.
1 and 2 in S.L.P. Criminal No.
5 together at any time.
The State of Gujarat filed Criminal Appeal No.
462 of 1973 was filed by accused 1, 2 and 5 against their companyviction and the sentences awarded to them by the learned Magistrate.
3 and 5 as regards their companyviction under Section 66 1 b and Section 65 e read with Section 81 of the Act and the sentences.
1 and 2 in the truck.
P.W. 6 answered in the affirmative.
5 working as manager with reference to the truck GTD 4098 and he has admittedly number seen the truck and accused No.
153 of 1975 has arisen has been restricted to the offence under Section 65 e of the Act.
If Pesumal was the real owner of the valuable truck it is number probable that he would have put it numberinally in the name of P W 11.
110 to 149 from the Assistant Chemical Examiner, Baroda PW 16 and companypleting the investigation PW 18 filed the charge sheet on 27.5.1971.
But since the informant has number been examined as a witness the evidence of PW 12 that he was informed that accused Nos.
He ordered these accused to undergo imprisonment for two months under each of the two companynts in default of payment of the fine.
PW 18 arrested all the seven accused who were handed over to him by PW 12 alongwith the properties and the panchnama and all of them proceeded to Matar Police Station where PW 18 examined PW 12.
5, is appellant in Criminal Appeal No.
109 of 1975.
The prosecution has failed to prove that accused No.
On enquiry PW 12 learnt from some persons that a taxi was going ahead beyond Nayka.
1 and 2 as regards their companyviction under Section 65 e read with Section 81 and with accused Nos.
On a careful companysideration of the evidence, We are of the opinion that it is number reasonably possible to companye to the companyclusion that accused Nos, 3 and 5 were companynected with the prohibited liquor found in the truck GTD 4098.
After directing two SRP companystables to take care of the truck PW 12 came back to Kaira by the Imphala car with some SRP companystables and proceeded in the other road towards Nayka.
When examined about the circumstances appearing against the accused in the evidence accused No.
3 to 6 from PW 2 and left the place with all the seven accused after informing P.W. 2 that he would take later the plastic packet and papers which had been given to PW 2 by PW 4 earlier.
The prosecution also relies upon the evidence of PW 3, Natwarlal Manilal of Nayka, PW 4 Nayan Prasad Bhatt of Nayka, PW 5, Fetah Singh of Nayka, PW 6, Vithal Bhala of Nayka and Becharbhai, the Police Patel of Nayka, PW 2 to show that accused 3 to 6 got down from a taxi at Nayka and went into the village and were produced by PW 6 and others before PW 2, and on the evidence of PW 12 that at some distance away from Nayka he over took the taxi GTD 7555 and found the seventh accused alone in the taxi and he brought the taxi with the seventh accused to Nayka and proceeded to the Village Chora.
1 stated that he was carrying only vegetables in the truck and was detained by the police illegally when he questioned the police about what had happened to the truck which was standing on the national high way with many people around.
There upon P.W. 12 went to the Village Chora in his car with the taxi and seventh accused and took over accused Nos.
After hearing learned Counsel for both the parties we found that the offence under Section 65 e read with Section 81 of the Act against all these four accused and he offence under Section 66 1 b of the Act against accused Nos.
2 stated that when he was standing at the State Transport bus stand at Nayka in the evening two police men came and took him.
When the police party signaled for the truck to stop it was driven in full speed on the national high way towards Ahmedabad.
PW 4 picked up a bag like thing thrown away by accused No.
Bhugdomal Gangaram and Gulabji Jesangji, accused Nos.
Shyamsunder Parbhuram, accused No.
P.W. 6 found that the jeep and car which proceeded towards Navgam, returned to the Nayka S.T. bus stand.
After the truck was stopped PW 12 found the driver and companyductor accused 1 and 2 sitting in the cabin and 40 drums kept in the truck below tad patri.
The evidence of PW 11 who claims to be maintaining himself by doing bhikshavarti is that one Pesumal put the truck GTD 4098 numberinally in his name and was operating it himself with accused No.
4 and 6 have admitted their presence at Nayka during the night of 12.9.1970 and to have been produced before PW 2 by some of the residents of that village and to have been subsequently taken by PW 12 to the place where the truck GTD 4098 had been detained by PW 12 earlier, the evidence about how these four accused have been produced before PW 2 is discrepent.
3 and 6 respectively, are appellants in Criminal Appeal Nos.
3 and 5 as well as accused Nos.
462 of 1973 and Criminal Appeal No.
These five accused and Mohan Hairomal and Chandubhai Jivabhai Ihakur, accused Nos.
5 was the manager of the truck GTD 4098 on the relevant date.
5 was the manager of the truck GTD 4098 is inadmissible.
Therefore, after arranging for some SRP persons to companye by a jeep and report to him at Kaira Excise Chowki post, PW 12 proceeded to that Chowki post in an Imphala car.
The officer P.W. 12 got down from the car and asked P.W. 6 whether four persons got down from the taxi.
Hence these appeals by special leave.
26 and took one bottle of sample from each of the drums.
The sixth accused Gulabji Jesangji died pending the appeal in this Court.
5 with the prohibited liquor which was being transported by accused Nos.
May be one may suspect that accused Nos.
Though accused Nos.
1 to show that accused No.
71 when he examined him first at Matar Police Station at about 4 or 4.15 A.M. on 13.9.1970, that subsequently PW 12 told him that some important papers of this case are with PW 2 at Nayka and that he therefore recorded an additional statement of PW 12 at about 5.30 A.M. at Matar Police Station.
3 to 6 before the Police Patel Becharbhai PW 2 at the Village Chora Panchayat office at about 8 P.M. Nayan Prasad PW 4 saw accused No.
Subsequently PWs 45 and 18, proceeded to Nayka in two different vehicles.
After PW 18 examined some witnesses at Nayka on that day and some other witnesses later at other places, he sent the samples drawn by PW 12 to Baroda for chemical analysis.
1 and 2 respectively, are appellants in Criminal Appeal No.
1 was the driver of truck No.
3 and 4 would be companying behind the truck in a taxi is number admissible.
When PW 2 questioned accused Nos.
The fourth accused Mohan Hairomal died before he companyld be examined under Section 342 of the old CrPC.
Since Pesumal has number been examined as a witness the evidence of PW 11 that Pesumal told him that accused No.
3 and 5 were companycerned with the transport of the prohibited liquor in the truck.
4 and 6 on 12.9.1970 and to have been produced before the Police Patel PW 2 and subsequently taken by the police.
77 of 1975 and 78 of 1975 respectively.
153 of 1975.
This recovery and evidence of PW 11 are relied upon for companynecting accused No.
5 with bag like thing in his hand entering the temple at Nayka in a frightened companydition a little earlier.
PW 11 has numberpersonal knowledge about accused No.
3 , Mohan Hairomal Accused No.
428 of 1975 out of which Criminal Appeal No.
awarded to them by the learned Single Judge.
On receipt of a telephonic message from the Inspector General of Police in the early hours on 13.9.1970, A.K. Mehta, Inspector of Police, Crime Branch, P.W. 1.8 proceeded to the place where the truck had been detained by PW 12, and reached that place at about 2.20 A.M. on 13.9.1970 when PW 12 was preparing the panchnama for the seizure of the properties from the truck.
The taxi GTD 7555 which came behind the truck got a jerk and halted there.
4 and 7 respectively, were tried by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Matar in his Camp Court, Ahmedabad for offences under Sections 65 a d e , 66 1 b and 81 of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949.
5 when he was being taken to the Village Chora and produced it before PW 2.
Varadarajan, J. These Criminal Appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Gujarat High Court C.V. Rane, J. in Criminal Revision Application No.
Thavardas Parasram and Prabhakar Devram, accused Nos.
So in these Appeals Nos.
593 of 1973.
PW 2 produced before PW 18 a small plastic packet and the papers which had been handed over to him by PW 4 and they were taken by PW 18 under the panchnama Ex.
4339 belonging to DW 1 in 1970.
He took two panch witnesses also from Nayka to that place.
3 to 6 before they were brought to the Village Chora.
The samples were found to be diluted alcohol.
Accused Nos.
