LAWS(P&H)-1998-7-103

SARDOOL SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

Decided On July 30, 1998
SARDOOL SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 8-4-1984 at about 1.15 a.m. HC Sukhwinder Singh along with HC Jai Singh, Constables Mohinder Singh and Om Parkash etc. was present near Ottu Head in connection with patrolling duty and excise checking. Balbir Singh PW was also present with them. In the meantime Sardool Singh-accused (petitioner herein) was sighted coming from the side of village Moujdin with a gunny bag in his right hand. At the sight of the police party, he swerved and tried to conceal himself behind the bushes. It gave rise to suspicion in the mind of HC Sukhwinder Singh. Accused was accordingly apprehended. That bag was found to contain opium weighing two kgs wrapped in glazed paper. 10 grams of opium was taken out as sample. Sample opium and the remaining opium were made into separate parcels, sealed with seal of HC Sukhwinder Singh bearing impression SS. Seal after use was handed over to Balbir Singh. On the basis of a ruqa sent to Police Station, Rania, case FIR No. 172 dated 8-6-1984 was registered at Police Station, Rania. Bag and sealed parcels of opium were taken into possession. Sample was sent to the Chemical Examiner for chemical examination. Chemical Examiner found the contents of the sample to be opium. Accused was charged on 28-4-1984.

(2.) On the conclusion of the trial, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirsa vide order dated 10-4-1994 found the charge under Section 9 of the Opium Act proved against the accused. He accordingly convicted him thereunder and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- or in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for three months.

(3.) Not satisfied with his conviction and sentence, Sardool Singh-accused went in appeal to the Court of Session, which was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa as regards conviction. He reduced the sentence to one year rigorous imprisonment. Sentence of fine was, however, allowed to remain. Still not satisfied, he has not come up in revision, to this Court.