Baldeo Pandey v. Emperor

1. The accused in this case has been found guilty by the learned Magistrate of an offence under section 295 of the Municipalities Act. It appears that the Municipal peon demanded the sum of one anna as Tah Bazari from a certain Gur seller on the ground that be was selling Gur in a public place and was therefore liable to the charge under the Municipal Bye-laws.

2. This person refused to pay on the ground that he had very little Gur to sell. A dispute followed, in the course of which the accused arrived on the scene. He advised the Gur seller not to pay as he said that it was wrong that a charge should be made ab the Octroi Post and again in the street. In this he was of course entirely wrong. He told the peon to take the Gur seller to the Municipal office. All three persons proceeded to the Municipal office but unfortunately no higher official was present ab the time. The accused advised the Gur seller not to wait and they went away together. The accused has now been found guilty of obstructing a Municipal official in discharge of his duty. The accused may have been actuated by a spirit of mischief and opposition to the Municipal administration or he may have been moved by a feeling of indignation ab what he might in good faith have considered an Act of petty tyranny. His action does not seem to me to come within the meaning of the word “obstruction”. He did not prevent the Municipal peon from taking any action which he considered necessary and which he had authority to bake. He merely advised the Gar seller not to pay. If the Gur seller had been guilty of an offence by not paying, the accused would no doubt have been guilty of abetment, in that he incited the accused not to pay. Surely it cannot be an offence to refuse to pay a Municipal charge. The Municipality has its proper legal remedy. Every charge made by the Municipality is not necessarily justifiable. While sympathizing with the Municipal peons whose duties are probably not very easy I am distinctly of opinion that the action of the accused does not amount to obstruction of a Municipal servant in the performance of his duty. The case will therefore be reported to the Hon'ble High Court with the recommendation that the finding and sentence should be set aside and the accused acquitted,”

Stuart, J.:— I agree with the learned Sessions Judge and set aside the conviction and sentence and direct that the fine, if paid, be refunded.

3. Conviction set aside.