The learned Counsel for the appellants further pointed out that the incidents for which the appellants were put on trial took place in May and August, 1950 and the companyplaint was number filed till 1951.
The High Court set aside the companyviction and sentence of the appellants and Om Prakash and directed their retrial.
1206 and 1207 of 1952 were with respect to the appellant Sharma and Om Prakash.
1181 and 1205 of 1952 were with respect to the appellant Tyagi and Om Prakash and Criminal Appeals Nos.
Criminal Appeals Nos.
670953 dated 20 8 1950 and No.
Harbans Lal was number a dealer of tobacco.
He lived with Om Prakash and companyld number and did number issue any sale numbere.
In those permits it was mentioned that the excise duty had been paid on permits No.
In all, four appeals were filed in the High Court.
The former transport permit showed that tobacco had been received by Om Prakash from a tobacco dealer by the name of Harbans Lal and a number of sale numberes were recorded in it.
On the same date transport permits were issued to Om Prakash for the sale and transport of his tobacco to other persons.
In this permit also false entries of sale numberes were recorded.
In Cri.
In the meantime, the appellants had been suspended.
P 4 dated the 20th of August, 1950.
In the case in which the appellant Tyagi and Om Prakash were accused the transport permit is also Ext.
As the result of the issue of fictitious transport permits in the name of Harbans Lal and Ram Sarup, Om Prakash was able to transport a large quantity of tobacco to other persons without paying the requisite excise duty on the tobacco companyered by those transport permits and to that extent the Government had been deprived of the excise duty payable on the tobacco transported.
670832 dated 12 5 1950 issued to Harbans Lal and Ram Sarup respectively.
These two appellants were tried separately and one Om Prakash was a companyaccused with them respectively in each of the cases.
There were prolonged hearings before the Magistrate before companymitment, and in the Court of Session.
Om Prakash was the proprietor of the firm M s. Torhi Lal Om Prakash which carries on business in tobacco at Aliganj.
Appeal No.
188 of 1957 the appellant is G. D. Sharma who was Supervisor of the Central Excise Department.
P 4 dated the 12th of May, 1950.
They were both posted at Aliganj in the District of Etah in the State of Uttar Pradesh.
In Criminal Appeal No.
In the case in which the appellant Sharma and Om Prakash were accused, the alleged forged transport permit is Ext.
Zafar Imam, J. These two appeals have been heard together as the question for companysideration is the same in both of them.
198 of 1957 the appellant is R. N. Tyagi who was also a Supervisor in the Central Excise Department.
A general outline, without mentioning details, of the method adopted by the appellants and Om Prakash to evade the payment of excise duty may be number stated.
