AROOR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been directed against the order of conviction and sentence recorded by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Karnal, dated 19th of September, 1987 vide which Aroor Singh petitioner was held guilty for an offence under Section 61(1)(a) of the Punjab Excise Act and ordered to undergo R.I. for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- or in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for three months. This order of conviction and sentence has since been upheld by Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal, vide his order dated 14th of November, 1987 in appeal.

(2.) BROADLY , the prosecution case has been that on 7th of December, 1983 at about 8.45 A.M. Head Constable Shiv Kumar alongwith Head Constable Randhir Singh and other police officials were present in village Bansa in connection with excise checking when he received secret information against the petitioner that he was in the habit of distilling illicit liquor at his dera and if raid was conducted liquor or lahan in sufficient quantity could be recovered from him. Head Constable Shiv Kumar sent intimation (ruqa) Ex. PF and raid and search was conducted at the premises of the petitioner. The petitioner was interrogated and during the said interrogation, he made disclosure statement that he had kept concealed one drum of lahan fit for distillation under the ground in his cattle shed and could get the same recorded (recovered ?). The petitioner led the police party and got recovered one drum containing 200 Kgs of lahan. The same was sealed and taken into possession vide memo Ex.PC. The contents of drum were tested by Raj Singh Excise Inspector the next day and he vide his report Ex. PQ found the contents of drum to be lahan fit for distillation of illicit liquor. After investigation the petitioner was challaned and put up for trial under Section 16(1)(a) [61(1)(a) ?] of the Punjab Excise Act.

(3.) WHEN examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner denied incriminating material put to him and pleaded false implication.