STATE OF U P Vs. UMESH GUPTA AND ANOTHER
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
STATE OF U P
Umesh Gupta And Another
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Accused-respondents Umesh Gupta and Karam Pal were acquitted of the charge under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, by learned Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act, Dehraudun, vide order dated 20.04.2000. Aggrieved against the said order, present Government Appeal was preferred on behalf of the then State of U.P., on 15.09.2000. A prayer was made that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow the Appeal, set aside the order of acquittal of the accused, convict and sentence them according to law.
(2.) On 29.09.1990, SO Sahaspur, on receiving information from Police Informer, reached Everest Cylinder Private Limited, Selakui, along with two sub-inspectors, one head constable and four police constables in a police jeep, which was being driven by a driver constable. They tried to procure public witness, but none of the witness was willing to be a witness. When the police officials reached near the gate of the Everest Cylinder Private Limited, Selakui, they saw a truck coming out of the factory premise.
They stopped the truck. A person jumped from the truck and ran away towards the factory premise. Since that man was known to the police personnel from before this incident, therefore they could recognize that he was Umesh Kumar Gupta. He was not apprehended on the spot. They arrested three other persons, who were sitting in the truck.
One of them revealed his name as Karam Pal, who was supervisor of the factory. The others were driver and cleaner of the truck. The truck was loaded with empty gas cylinders, which the accused disclosed that the same were being taken to Jalandhar. There were 299 cylinders in all.
All the cylinders bore the marks of Bharat Gas and Indane.
The accused persons could not produce the papers relating to the said gas cylinders. Recovery memo (Ext. Ka-1) was prepared. Two cylinders were sealed, which were exhibited during the course of trial as material Exts. 1 & 2. The charge was framed against the accused persons including the accused-respondents. Two of the accused absconded during the trial and hence their files were separated.
(3.) PW 1 SI Vinod Kumar; PW 2 SI Sarvanand; PW 3 A.K.Vij, Excise Inspector; PW 4 Ram Singh, Stenographer in the office of D.M., Dehradun (who proved sanction (Ext. Ka-2); and PW 5 SI Ranjeet Singh were examined on behalf of the prosecution. Incriminating evidence was put to the accused persons under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in reply to which, they said that they have been falsely implicated in the case. DW 1 Bharat Singh was examined in defence. After considering the evidence on record, learned Special Judge acquitted accusedrespondents of the charge framed against them. Aggrieved against the impugned Judgment and Order dated 20.04.2000, present Government Appeal was preferred by the State.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.