Nemai Charan Sahu vs Emperor

John Bucknill, J.—This is a reference by the Officiating Sessions Judge of Cuttack, recommending that the conviction of a certain man cailed Nemai Charan Sahn, u/s 62 of the Stamp Act, by the Deputy Magistrate of Banki, dated the 28th January of this year, under which the accused was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 30 for an offence in contravention of the Stamp Act, be set aside. It would appear that an unstamped receipt was filed before the Deputy Magistrate who, finding it without a stamp, started a proceeding u/s 62 of the Stamp Act against the accused, who admitted that he had given the receipt unstamped. The document was impounded and the Collector eventually sanctioned the prosecution.

In the proceedings, the applicant frankly admitted that he had executed the receipt but said that he did not know that it required a stamp. The Deputy Magistrate held that ignorance of the law was no excuse and found the man guilty and sentenced him as I have indicated above.

The Officiating Sessions Judge points out that it is clear there could be no finding, and was no finding, that the applicant had the least intention of evading the provisions of the Stamp Law. The Stamp Act provides in itself, in connection with receipts, payment of the stamp duty and penalty and not a prosecution under the provisions of this Act, The accused was not given any opportunity of paying the duty and penalty and there was nothing to show that he had any criminal intent. The finding, therefore, appears to be bad and the conviction and sentence should be set aside and the fine, if paid refunded.