Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Gajanan S/o. Vikram Gose, was convicted by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tiroda, for an offence under Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949, and sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment. The conviction arose from a raid on 06.05.2012, where police recovered three liters of illicit liquor from a wadi adjacent to his house. The Chemical Analyzer report confirmed the liquid contained 14.40% ethyl alcohol and was not a medicinal or flavoring preparation. The applicant appealed to the Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia, which was dismissed. He then filed a criminal revision application before the Bombay High Court. The High Court examined the evidence, including the testimony of PW-4 (the investigating officer) and panch witnesses, and found the prosecution's case to be consistent and credible. The court noted that the recovery was made in the presence of panchas and the sample was properly sealed and sent for analysis. The conviction was upheld. However, considering the applicant's age (62 years) and that he had already undergone about six months of imprisonment, the court found the sentence of three years to be excessive. The court exercised its revisional jurisdiction to reduce the sentence to the period already undergone, while confirming the conviction. The revision application was partly allowed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Possession of Illicit Liquor - Section 65(e) Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949 - Conviction - The applicant was convicted for possessing three liters of illicit liquor containing 14.40% ethyl alcohol. The court upheld the conviction based on consistent evidence of PW-4 and panch witnesses, and the Chemical Analyzer report. Held that the prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 2-6).
B) Criminal Law - Sentence Reduction - Section 65(e) Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949 - The applicant, aged 62 years, had already undergone about 6 months of imprisonment. Considering his age and the period of incarceration, the court reduced the sentence to the period already undergone while maintaining the conviction. Held that the sentence is modified to the period already undergone (Paras 7-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the applicant under Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949 is sustainable and whether the sentence of three years rigorous imprisonment is excessive.
Final Decision
The revision application is partly allowed. The conviction of the applicant under Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949 is confirmed. The sentence of rigorous imprisonment for three years is modified to the period already undergone by the applicant. The applicant is directed to be released forthwith if not required in any other case.
Law Points
- Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act
- 1949
- possession of illicit liquor
- conviction upheld
- sentence reduction
- period already undergone
Case Details
2023 LawText (BOM) (06) 196
Criminal Revision Application (REVN) No. 135 of 2016
Sneha Dhote for applicant, Mayuri H. Deshmukh for non-applicant/State
Shri Gajanan S/o. Vikram Gose
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal revision application challenging conviction and sentence under Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949.
Remedy Sought
The applicant sought to set aside the conviction and sentence or reduce the sentence.
Filing Reason
The applicant was convicted for possessing three liters of illicit liquor and sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment.
Previous Decisions
The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tiroda convicted the applicant and sentenced him to three years rigorous imprisonment. The Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia dismissed the appeal.
Issues
Whether the conviction under Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949 is sustainable.
Whether the sentence of three years rigorous imprisonment is excessive.
Submissions/Arguments
The applicant argued that the conviction was based on insufficient evidence.
The State supported the conviction and sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The conviction under Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949 is sustainable based on the evidence of recovery of illicit liquor and the Chemical Analyzer report. However, considering the age of the accused and the period of imprisonment already undergone, the sentence can be reduced to the period already undergone in the interest of justice.
Judgment Excerpts
In this revision application, challenge is to the judgment and order dated 11.09.2015, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal filed by the applicant/accused against his conviction and sentence awarded by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tiroda, for the offence punishable under Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949.
The facts are as follows: PW-4 Police Head Constable Sunil Lakhanprasad Yadav is the informant as well as investigating officer.
It is the case of the prosecution that on 06.05.2012 PW-4 received secret information that one person by name Gajanan S/o. Vikram Gose, R/o. Garada was illegally selling the liquor at his house.
In the said wadi, they found one plastic can containing three liters illicit liquor.
CA opined that the sample contained 14.40 % of ethyl alcohol in water.
Learned Magistrate on consideration of the evidence held the accused guilty and sentenced him, as above.
Considering the age of the applicant and the period of imprisonment already undergone by him, I am of the view that the sentence of three years rigorous imprisonment is on higher side.
Hence, the following order: The revision application is partly allowed.
Procedural History
The applicant was convicted by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tiroda on an unspecified date and sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment under Section 65(e) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949. He appealed to the Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia, which was dismissed on 11.09.2015. He then filed the present criminal revision application before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, which was decided on 23.06.2023.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949: 65(e)
