RACHHPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE prosecution case in brief is that on 22.3.84, ASI Avtar Singh etc. were going towards village Khanna in connection with patrolling. When they reached near the pathway leading to village Turewala from Khanna in the revenue limits of village Khanna, tractor trolley was sighted coming from the side of village Wra Suleman. At the sight of the police party, the driver slowed down the speed of the tractor trolley. Police party signalled the tractor trolley to halt. It was halted. It was being driven by Rachhpal Singh. Mangat Singh and Tara Singh were found sitting in the tractor trolley on tubes containing illicit liquor. Rachhpal Singh, Mangat Singh and Tara Singh were apprehended. Six tubes P1 to P6 containing illicit liquor were recovered. 375 ml. of illicit liquor was taken out of each of the tubes. Each tube was found to contain 99-1/2 bottles of illicit liquor. After liquor had been measured, the same was re-transferred in the same tubes. Sample nips and the rubber tubes were sealed at the spot with seal bearing impression AS. Rough site plan was prepared at the spot with correct marginal notes. Ruqa Ex. PB was sent to the police station on the basis of which case FIR Ex. PB/1 was registered against the accused at PS Makhu. Sample nips and the tubes were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PA attested by the PWs. On return to the police station, ASI Avtar Singh deposited the case property with MHC. Sample nips were sent to the chemical examiner who vide report Ex.PD found the same to be containing illicit liquor. After investigation, Rachhpal Singh, Mangat Singh and Tara Singh were challaned.

(2.) AT the conclusion of the trial, Judicial Magistrate First Class, Zira found the charge under Section 61(1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act proved against the accused. He accordingly convicted them thereunder and sentenced them to undergo RI for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- each or in default to undergo further RI for four months each. Accused went in appeal to the Court to Session. Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur dismissed the appeal.

(3.) ACCUSED was convicted on the testimony of ASI Avtar Singh and that of HC Tarlok Singh. It is true that police officials are usually interested in the success of the case detected by them but it is equally true why should they implicate one falsely when they do not have any animus against him. In this case, there is nothing on the record to suggest that they had any animus to implicate the accused falsely. After all, they have also conscience. Why should they implicate him falsely when they know that this case can land him in jail for a period of one year in the minimum. If there is discrepancy in the statement of the PWs, that can be attributed to their delayed examination at the trial. As we know, with the lapse of time, one's memory fades to some extent. In my opinion, accused was justifiably convicted by the courts below. He was not a previous convict. Ends of justice would be squarely met if he is released on probation of good conduct. He was put up on trial in the year 1984. We are now in the year 2000. During this span of 16 years, vagaries of this trial must have been hanging heavy on him. Keeping in view that he is a first offender and also vagaries of this trial have been hanging heavy on him for the last 16 years, I think he should be released on probation of good conduct under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. He is ordered to be released on probation of good conduct under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- together with surety bond in the said amount for a period of 2 years. During this period, he shall undertake to be good behaviour and keep peace. During this period, he shall remain under the supervision of District Probation Officer, Ferozepur.