Oak, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal against an order of acquittal. A.M. Das was prosecuted on the following allegations:
(2.) THE accused is the proprietor of a cinema house at Mahoba. Under the rules an owner of a cinema house is prohibited from seating visitors on the floor. In spite of that prohibition, the accused seated visitors in the cinema house at Mahoba on the floor on three successive days in November, 1957. The accused was therefore prosecuted Under Section 8 of the UP Cinema's (Regulation) Act, 1955 read with R.l(vi) of the UP Cinematograph Rules, 1951. When the accused was examined by the learned Magistrate at the commencement of the trial, the accused admitted that under certain circumstances he seated visitors on the floor. The accused gave an explanation why it became necessary to seat visitors on the floor. The accused stated that he had another cinema house at Charkbari. It became necessary to remove furniture from Mahoba to Charkbari. That was why the visitors had to sit on the floor at the cinema house at Mahoba. The learned Magistrate was not satisfied with the explanation offered by the accused. The accused was convicted, and was fined Rs. 200.
(3.) A .M. Das appealed against the order of conviction. The appeal was allowed by the learned Sessions Judge of Hamirpur. The accused was acquitted on 20 -3 -59. The State of UP has filed the present appeal against the order of acquittal dated 20 -3 -1959.;