GURMEL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment will dispose of the above criminal revision, as well as Cr. R. 1493/1980, Gurmel Singh v. State of Punjab as they arise out of the same judgment.

(2.) IT is not necessary to give the prosecution story in detail. Suffice it to say that on 23.9.1977, Gurmel Singh, the present petitioner (in both the revisions petition) and Sawaranjit Singh were found distilling illicit liquor by use of a working still by the raiding party which consisted of Police Officials, Excise Inspector and one non-official witness named Amar Singh. They were also found in possession of 2-1/4 bottles of illicit liquor and 16 kgs. of Lahan. During the investigation of that case, Gurmel Singh made a disclosure statement and got recovered one drum which contained Lahan which was found fit for distilling illicit liquor. The Police presented two separate challans in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate I Class, Ludhiana. One was in respect of the commission of an offence by Gurmel Singh under section 61(1)(a) of the Punjab Excise Act (for short the Act) and the second was against Swaranjit Singh and Gurmel Singh and was in respect of the commission of an offence under section 61(1)(c) and 61(1)(a) of the Act. The learned Judicial Magistrate tried both the cases separately. In the case which was against Sawarnjit Singh and Gurmel Singh,he acquitted the former, but convicted the latter under both the offences and sentenced him to imprisonment and to pay fine. In the other case under section 61(1)(a) of the Act, he convicted the petitioner and sentenced him to imprisonment and to pay fine. Gurmel Singh filed separate appeals in the two cases which were heard by the learned Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. The appeal filed in the case relating to section 61(1)(a) and section 61(1)(c) of the Act was registered in that Court at Serial No. 213 of 1980 and the other appeal at serial No. 214 of 1980. The learned Sessions Judge clubbed both the appeals. He dealt in detail with the case under section 61(1)(c) and section 61(1)(a) of the Act and devoted only one paragraph to the appeal arising out of the case under section 61(1)(a) of the Act. He dismissed both the said appeals vide the impugned order. Feeling dissatisfied, Gurmel Singh has filed these two criminal revision petitions in this Court. The present one relates to the case under section 61(1)(a) and section 61(1)(c) of the Act, while the other No. Cr. R. 1493/1980 relates to the case under section 61(1)(a) of the Act.

(3.) HENCE , I accept both the revision petitions and set aside the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, relating to both the cases and direct that both the appeals be heard again and disposed of separately. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Sessions Judge Ludhiana on the 16th day of August, 1983.