POORAN CHAND Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 31.8.84 passed by H Additional Sessions Judge dismissing the appeal and maintaining the conviction under Sec. 60 of the Excise Act and sentence of six month's rigorous imprisonment and to fine of Rs. 500.00 recorded by VI Additional Munsif Magistrate Saharanpur.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A.

(3.) The learned counsel for the revisionist contended that the finding recorded by the courts below is erroneous. However it could not be pointed out that the findings are based on no evidence on record or there is any perversity. The scope to interfere in the findings recorded on appraisal of the evidence is very limited and the revisional court cannot interfere unless any perversity is pointed out. In my opinion the revisionist was rightly convicted.