STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. MEHAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent was accused of having committed an offence under Section 61(1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 on 14-4-1984 when he was found distilling illicit liquor near a pond in the area of Basti Araian Wali within the jurisdiction of police Station Guru Harsahai, District Ferozepur.

(2.) DETAIL of the prosecution story need not be given as the same has been mentioned in paragraph 2 of the impugned judgment. During the trial the prosecution examined as many as three witnesses namely; HC Sajjan Singh (PW 1), HC Avtar Singh (PW 2)and Shri J C. Sharia, Excise Inspector (PW 3)to prove the factum of recovery of a working still at the spot being run by the accused. The link evidence was sought to be proved by examining PW 4 Avtar Singh, Constable and PW 5 HC Sukhwinder Singh, to prove their formal affidavits Exts. PE and PF respectively. The report of the Chemical Examiner (Ext. PG) was also tendered in evidence. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused when examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the allegations of the prosecution version and pleaded innocence. In defence, Constable Kewal Krishan (PW 1) was examined.

(3.) THE trial Court acquitted the accused on the short ground that link evidence was missing in the case. This matter by the trial Court has been dealt with elaborately in paragraph No. 7 of its judgment which is reproduced below :- "It was argued by the learned counsel for the accused that the link evidence is missing in this case. This contention has force. According to the constable Kewal Krishan DW 1 firstly the sample was sent to the office of Chemical Examiner through constable Sukhdev Singh and the sample was received back with the objection in the police station. Then the sample was taken by constable Avtar Singh and the same was received back with objection and third time the sample was taken by constable Avtar Singh to the office of Chemical Examiner. The affidavit of constable Avtar Singh Ex. PE shows that he took the sample on 30.5.1984 and deposited the same in the office of Chemical Examiner on the same day. Constable Avtar Singh has nowhere declared in his affidavit about the taking of the sample earlier to the office of Chemical Examiner. Constable Kewal Krishan DW 1 has categorically deposed in his statement that on 16.5.84 constable Avtar Singh took the sample to the office of Chemical Examiner. Even the affidavit of MHC Sukhwinder singh Ex PF shows that he handed over the sample to Constable Avtar Singh on 30.5.84. The affidavit of MHC Sukhwinder Singh is silent about the taking of the sample by constable Sukhdev Singh or by constable Avtar Singh earlier. Constable Kewal Krishan DW 1 has categorically deposed that on 19.4.84 the sample was taken by Constable Sukhdev Singh to the office of Chemical Examiner and then on 16.5.84 the sample was taken to the office of Chemical Examiner by Constable Avtar Singh and both the times the sample was received with objection and finally the sample was taken by constable Avtar Singh on 30.5.84 to the office of the Chemical Examiner. The prosecution has not filed the affidavit of constable Sukhdev Singh as well as the affidavit of Constable Avtar singh regarding taking over of the sample to the office of chemical Examiner on 16.5.84. So without these affidavits it cannot be said that the case property or sample remained intact. So the link evidence is missing in the case."