MADAN LAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was found guilty under Section 16 (l) (a) read with Section 61 (1 (a) of the Punjab Excise Act. The prosecution case is that the appellant was a contractor and he was found in possession of 90 litres of spirit. The same was seized under a panchnama and a case was registered and a challan was filed. The accused denied the allegation. The trial court convicted him and sentenced him to undergo one year's R1 and to pay a fine of Rs. 500. 00 in default of which to undergo six months' R1. The appeal preferred by him was dismissed by the Sessions court. The revision was also dismissed by the High court. All the three courts have found that the appellant was in exclusive possession of the house from which the recovery of spirit was effected.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant, however, submits that during the search, the provisions of Section 104 Criminal Procedure Code are not complied with, namely, that the two respectable witnesses were not summoned. We do not think that this by itself is illegal once the court accepts the evidence of official witnesses and finds the same to be trustworthy. Therefore, we see no ground to interfere.

(3.) Now coming to the sentence, the occurrence is said to have taken place in the year 1979. We think that the ends of justice would be met, if the sentence of one year's RI is reduced to six months' R1. The sentence of fine with default clause is, however, confirmed. Subject to this modification of sentence, the appeal is dismissed.