MOHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was involved on the basis of a secret information received by S.I. Risal Singh (then ASI on 25.11.1982, when the policy party was present in village Dacher in Police Station Nissing, District Karnal. The secret information was that the petitioner was indulging in distilling illicit liquor and in all certainty some illicit liquor or lahan could be recovered from him, if raid was conducted. On the basis of this information, a ruqa was sent to the Police Station where a case was registered. After formation of a police raiding party, a raid was conducted and the petitioner was found concealing the drum of lahan with Parali inside the tubewell Kotha. The petitioner was thus, apprehended when he was concealing a drum beneath the heap of parali in the said kotha. After checking the drum, it was found to contain 180 kgs. of lahan. The same was sealed with seal 'RK' and was taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex. PB. After investigation, a report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was submitted for an offence under Section 16(1)(a) of the Punjab Excise Act. During the trial the prosecution, examined PW-1 Shri Jai Singh Excise Inspector PW-2 Risal Singh Sub-Inspector, and PW-3 Avtar Singh Sub-Inspector, SHO Police Station Nissing. After the prosecution evidence was closed the petitioner was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein he denied the prosecution allegations. In his defence, he examined DW-1 Surat Singh.

(2.) After examining the evidence on the file the trial Court found the petitioner guilty under the said offence and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- or in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. The petitioner's appeal before the Sessions Court was unsuccessful. However, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment was reduced to three months.

(3.) The petitioner's counsel has challenged the conviction and sentence with the argument that the version of the prosecution is quite improbable. He was also urged that no independent witness was joined in spite of the fact that there was only a secret information about possession of illicit liquor or lahan and thus there was enough time for joining any respectable of the locality.