BHRAMARBAR DHAL Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Cuttack, confirming the order passed by learned Sub -divisional Judicial Magistrate, Athgarh, convicting the petitioner under Section 9(a) of the Opium Act and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for one month.

(2.) THE prosecution case in short is that P. W. 1, a Sub -Inspector of Excise searched the house of the petitioner in the presence of witnesses after observing the necessary legal formalities and seized 20 grams of opium, a receptacle, an opium cutting knife, a weighing scale and a few coins from the petitioner's bed room and seized the aforesaid articles by seizure -list (Ext -1), For possession of opium, the petitioner had no licence. After close of Investigation P. W. 1 submitted prosecution report against the petitioner.

(3.) THE learned Courts below recorded concurrent findings to the effect that the house of the petitioner was searched by P. W. 1 in the presence of witnesses P. Ws. 2, 3 and 4 after observing necessary legal formalities. The petitioner was present at that time in his house and gave his signature , in the seizure -list (Ext. 1). From the bed room of the petitioner 20 grams of opium and other articles described in detail in the seizure -list (Ext. 1) were seized. The petitioner had no licence for possession of opium. The evidence or the defence witnesses was disbelieved.