ASHOK KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a criminal revision and has been directed against the judgment dated 5.8.1988, passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Bathinda, who dismissed the appeal of the petitioner, who was convicted and sentenced by the trial Court under section 61(1)(a) of the Punjab Excise Act, and was directed to undergo RI for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-; in default of payment of fine, the petitioner was further directed to undergo RI for three months.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the on 18.3.1984, HC Mukhtiar Singh along with other police officials was holding a picket on the Rampura-Bathinda Road on the turning of road towards Maur. In the meantime, a jeep driven by the petitioner came there. It was stopped for checking. One Kundan Lal was also sitting in the Jeep. On search of the Jeep, 120 bottles of country wine liquor were recovered. The petitioner could not produce any licence or permit for the possession of the same. A sample of 180 mls. was taken from each of the bottles. Samples and bottles were sealed with the seal bearing impression 'MS' and the same were taken into possession along with Jeep No. DHC 391. Ruqa, Ex. PB, was sent to the police station, on the basis of which, formal FIR Ex. PB/1, was recorded and after completion of the investigation, the petitioner along with his co-accused Kundan Lal were challaned in the Court of the Area Magistrate. Kundan Lal did not appear despite proclamation, therefore, the proceedings continued against the petitioner. Copies of the documents were supplied to the petitioner. Charge under section 61(1)(a) of the Act was framed against the petitioner to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 2. In order to prove the charges, the prosecution examined HC Mukhtiar Singh and HC Jarnail Singh. The report of the Chemical Examiner, Ex. PD and the affidavits of the formal witnesses, Ex. PE and PF, were also tendered into evidence.

(3.) THE learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Phul, vide judgment and order dated 10.10.1987 convicted and sentenced the petitioner in the manner as stated above. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the trial Court, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Court of the Addl. Sessions Judge, Bathinda, who vide judgment dated 5.8.1988, dismissed the appeal and aggrieved by the same the present revision by the petitioner.