TEJ BAHADUR SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Three persons, Bechu Singh, Tej Bahadur Singh and Bans bahadur Singh, were convicted by a Magistrate, First Class, Bara Banki, under section 9 of the Opium Act. A sentence of two years' rigorous imprisonment and payment of fine of Rs. 2,000. 00 was imposed on each one of them. In default of payment of fine it was directed that each would have to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The Sessions Judge on appeal acquitted bans Bahadur Singh but confirmed the conviction and the sentence of the other two. The High court dismissed the petition for revision filed by Bechu singh and the appellant Tej Bahadur Singh. The present appeal has been filed by special leave by Tej Bahadur Singh alone.

(2.) The facts may bestated. On 14/06/1963, Sarkar, P. W. I, Deputy Superintendent central Excise, received information that the appellant and the two others were carrying on smuggling of opium on a large scale and that they had a huge stock of that article at their house in village Birapur. Sarkar organised a raiding party and on 15/06/1963, went to village Birapur. Two persons Vishum Parag and Manak Saran joined the party on the way. The raiding party arrived at the village at about 6 a. m. on 16/06/1963. According to the case of the prosecution the appellant and the other two persons were present in the house which was searched. At first I Maund and 3 Seers of opium were recovered from a small room. The appellant and Bechu Singhwere taken into custody but Bans Bahadur Singh managed to escape. On information given by Bechu Singh opium weighing 3 Maunds and 8 Seers was recovered from two cellars in the House. Similarly at the instance of the appellant 3 Maunds and 14 Seers of opium were recovered from two other places in the house. Thus the entire quantity of opium which was recovered weighed 7 Maunds and 25 Seers. The appellant and Bechu Singh were taken to the police station Bara Banki. Other formalities were then carried out and the report of the Chemical Examiner was obtained. The defence of the accused persons was one of denial of 'recovery of opium from their house. It was asserted that they had been falsely implicated on account of enmity with certain persons.

(3.) The High court took the view that the accused were influential persons in the locality and it was for that reason that no villager from the locality was willing to come forward and become a witness to the search. The raiding party was, therefore, justified in having the search memo witnessed by persons who accompanied it. The evidence of Sarkar, the-Deputy Superintendent of central Excise, and Inam Ali, Circle Inspector Kotwali, as also Mehrban Singh deputy Superintendent of Police, Bara Banki, was considered and the High court felt satisfied that the opium had been recovered from the house of the accused persons, these three officers were members of the raiding party and there was no suggestion that they were in any way interested in planting such a huge quantity of opium in the house of the accused persons and implicating them falsely.