SURENDRA KAUR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Smt. Surendra Kaur, applicant No. 1, is the wife of Mehar Singh applicant No.2, Both the applicants have been convicted under Section 9 of the Opium Act and they were sentenced to 3 years R.I. each together with a fine of Rs. 3,000/- each. In default of payment of fine, they were required to undergo 6 months imprisonment by the III AddI. Munsif-Magistrate, Pilibhit on 10-2-1986. Against the conviction and sentence so recorded, the applicants preferred Criminal Appeal No.9 of 1986, which was dismissed on 18-3-1986 by the Sessions Judge, Pilibhit. The present revision is the out come of the aforesaid conviction and sentence and was filed in this Court on 14-5-1986. It was admitted on the question of sentence, but the court while allowing the applicants to be released on bail imposed a condition that they would be released on bail provided the amount of fine as imposed on them is deposited. The applicant No.1 was a lady and somehow or the other the fine of Rs. 3,000/- as imposed on her was deposited but fine of Rs. 3,000/- as was imposed on applicantNb.2 (Mehar Singh) could not be deposited as a result whereof he could not be released on bail. He again moved this court for relaxation in the condition for de positing the fine and this court vide its order dated 15-4-1988 lifted the pre-condition of depositing of fine for being released on bail and it was after this that the applicant No.2 could be released.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the Excise inspector received an information from an informant on S-S-1981 that some contra bandy opium was kept in the house of Mehar Singh in village Bilsanda, District Pilibhit. On getting this information, the Excise Inspector proceeded after taking search warrant. On his reaching village Bilsanda, the applicant ran away from the house and could not be apprehended but his wife was in the house and in her presence a search was made and opium to the extent of 4 Kgs. 500 grams was recovered. The Excise Inspector on testing the same found to be the opium.

(3.) Both the courts below have recorded the Concurrent finding of fact relating to the guilt of the applicants. Apart from this, revision itself has been admitted on the question of sentence, I need not enter into, the merit of the matter.