Emperor vs Bishan Prasan

Tudball, J.—The applicant Bishan Prasad has been convicted u/s 185 of the Penal Code and has been sentenced to a fine of Rs. 100. He made bids at a sale held by the Collector of the right to sell drugs in a certain tahsil and gave a false name. When finally his last bid was sanctioned by the Board of Revenue, he denied that he had ever made any bids at all, and he has accordingly been prosecuted u/s 185 of the Code. The point raised on his behalf is that Section 185 does not contemplate a sale of this description. The language of the section, however, is wide. The right to sell drugs is a monopoly granted for a certain area and comes within the definition of property. It is impossible to hold that the word "property" in Section 185 is not used in its wide sense. The gist of the offence in the present case was the intention in the applicant''s mind not to perform the obligation under which he was laying himself at the time of bidding. The facts having been found against him, they clearly in my opinion come within the offence mentioned in the section. The case is similar to that of Queen v. Reazooddeen (1865) 3 W.R. Cr. R. 33.

There is no ground for interference. The application is therefore rejected.