PREM SINGH & ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through this order two Crl. Appeal Nos.841-SB and 861- SB of 2000 are being disposed of together. The facts have been taken from Crl. Appeal No.841-SB of 2000.

(2.) The appellants have filed the appeal to impugn their conviction under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act (for short 'the Act'). The appellants were prosecuted for this offence under the Act. In addition, appellant-Ranjit Singh was also charged for offences under Section 467/468/471 IPC. This case was registered on the basis of secret information received by the Inspector Parminder Singh on 1.7.1996. As per the information, appellant Prem Singh alias Leela and his brother Sukhdarshan Singh alias Kaka had allegedly stored kerosene oil without licence in their house. Information further was that if raid was conducted, kerosene oil in large quantity can be recovered from them. Ruqa was sent to the Police Station and the case was registered. Inspector Surinder Kumar Gupta, Grade-I, and Inspector Arjan Dass, Grade II of Food and Supplies Department were joined in the raiding party, which included S.I. Balwinder Singh as well. Raiding party had raided the Nohra(out house) of the house of Prem Singh and Sukhdarshan Singh and recovered 9 drums in all 8 out of which were containing 200 litres of blue kerosene oil, whereas ninth drum was containing 15 litres kerosene oil. Four empty drums were also lying there along with two empty cans of 20 litres capacity each. Even measurement pot of 5 litres capacity was also recovered and so also the pump for extracting kerosene oil from the drum, which was fitted on the drum containing 15 litres of kerosene oil. Sample was drawn from all the drums in bottles and then bottles and the drums were sealed. The seal was marked and the kerosene oil was taken in possession. The accused persons were arrested. The scene of incident was got photographed. On the following day, the house of Ranjit Singh was raided, who in fact was the depot holder and his sale and stock registers were also taken into possession along with 59 ration cards.

(3.) Having made some submissions on merit, counsel for the appellants has prayed for release of the appellants on probation on the ground that they have suffered enough and have faced a protracted trial. The licence issued to Ranjit Singh also stands cancelled. As per the record, Prem Singh-appellant was aged 68 years at the time of trial, whereas appellants Sukhdarshan Singh and Ranjit Singh are shown to be 55 years and 28 years respectively at that stage. By now, appellant-Prem Singh would be around 80 years old, whereas appellant-Sukhdarshan Singh would be 66-67 years and appellant-Ranjit Singh would be almost 40 years old. The defence counsel had pleaded for release of the appellants on probation before the trial Court. This plea was considered in terms of provisions of Sections 360 and 361 of the Cr.P.C and under the provisions of the Probation of offenders Act. The trial Court, however, had opined that the appellants did not deserve to be released on probation as they have indulged in antisocial activity by defrauding the general public.