Wrong statutory citation does not vitiate conviction where the offence is clearly proved and no prejudice is shown

A conviction for an Abkari offence was sustained even though the charge cited the wrong penal provision, because the facts clearly established the ingredients of the correct offence and no prejudice was shown to the accused. The Court treated the conviction as referable to the proper statutory provision. On sentence, the absence of any previous similar offending justified moderation, and the punishment was reduced to six months' simple imprisonment and a fine, with default imprisonment for non-payment.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether conviction for an offence under the Abkari law could be sustained where the charge referred to the wrong penal provision, though the facts disclosed the correct offence. (ii) Whether the sentence required interference.

Issue (i): Whether conviction for an offence under the Abkari law could be sustained where the charge referred to the wrong penal provision, though the facts disclosed the correct offence.

Analysis: The offence was committed in 1999 and the applicable provision was Section 8(1) of the Abkari Act, as amended, rather than Section 55(a). The wrong citation of the section did not cause prejudice, because the factual ingredients of the offence were clearly established. The conviction could therefore be treated as referable to the correct provision.

Conclusion: The conviction was upheld and the incorrect statutory reference did not vitiate the finding of guilt.

Issue (ii): Whether the sentence required interference.

Analysis: In view of the absence of any previous history of similar offending, the sentence was considered excessive and warranted moderation.

Conclusion: The sentence was reduced to six months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.50,000, with default simple imprisonment for three months.

Final Conclusion: The conviction was sustained, but the punishment was softened to the reduced term and fine awarded by the Court.

Ratio Decidendi: A conviction is not liable to be set aside merely because the wrong statutory provision was cited, if the offence is otherwise clearly made out and no prejudice is caused to the accused.

---