TMI Blog2006 (10) TMI 501X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fferent trains and some filled up as well as some unfilled reservation demand forms were recovered from him. A sum of ₹ 33,403/- was also found in his possession. A First Information Report was lodged. Allegedly, during investigation of the said case, he was found to have been carrying business in procuring reservation tickets illegally. Respondents herein were said to have abetted in commission of the said offence. On the said charge, Respondents herein with the aforementioned Suresh Shah were prosecuted. Whereas the said Suresh Shah was charged under Section 143 (1) of the Railway Act, 1989, Respondents herein were charged under Section 143(2) thereof. When the case was at an advanced stage, the said Suresh Shah absconded. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it would have been impossible for the said Suresh Shah to book so many tickets within a few hours, viz., from 0933 hrs. to 1916 hours. It was also submitted that Respondents did not raise any particular defence. The High Court, the learned counsel would submit, also committed a serious error in opining that Respondents had not been asked about the circumstantial evidence or evidence appearing against them by the learned Trial Judge while examining them under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Mr. P.N. Misra, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of Respondents, on the other hand, supported the judgment of the High Court. Before embarking upon the rival contentions of the parties, we may briefly no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tands admitted that the reservation forms were handled in different counters. Out of the six accused persons, three were in the morning shift and three were in the evening shift. From the timings of issuance of tickets, as noticed by the learned Trial Judge at paragraph 21 of its judgment, it appears that two tickets were found to have been issued at the same time from two counters. The learned Trial Judge in his judgment proceeded on the basis that the accused Nos. 2 to 7 had not acted in good faith as envisaged under Section 186 of the Railways Act. The fact that more than one ticket had been issued from different counters at the same time is not disputed. The possibility of the said Suresh Shah to have associat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no discretion in the matter but to issue tickets. Section 143(1) of the Railways Act reads, thus: 143. Penalty for unauthorised carrying on of business of procuring and supplying of railway tickets.-- (1) If any person, not being a railway servant or an agent authorised in this behalf.-- (a) carries on the business of procuring and supplying tickets for travel on a railway or for reserved accommodation for journey in a train; or (b) purchases or sells or attempts to purchase or sell tickets with a view to carrying on any such business either by himself or by any other person, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or with fine which may extend to ten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the offender is not abetment. Doing something with knowledge so as to facilitate him to commit the crime or otherwise would constitute abetment. ` Admittedly, the first and second part of the said provision has no application. No illegal omission on the part of Respondents has been established. Admittedly in issuing the tickets, Respondents have not violated any rules. Ex facie, they have also not violated any direction contained in any circular issued by an appropriate authority in that behalf. The entire prosecution is based on the purported confession of Suresh Shah. A statement of an accused would be admissible against a co-accused only in terms of Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act. Such a statement of co-accused was re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
