(1.) THE respondent was acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 61 (1) (a) (c) of the Punjab Excise Act as applicable to State of Himachal Pradesh, for allegedly having found in possession of a working still. The acquittal of the respondent has been challenged in this appeal by the State.
(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record. In brief, the prosecution case has been that on 4-12-1994 at about 3.30 p.m. the then S.H.O. Basher Singh was on patrol duty at Gugaghat along with other Police officials. He received the secret information that the respondent was dealing in illicit liquor. Thus he organized a raiding party where in he had associated Rameshwar and Bishan Singh as independent witnesses. The house and the cattle shed of the respondent were raided. During the search operation, the respondent was allegedly found running a working still. Lahan was in an aluminium utensil which was kept on the hearth. It was boiling and the connection Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment? Yes. was given through a pipe to the vessel, locally called "Tokkani". The said Tokkani was containing 20 ltrs of illicit liquor. After cooling down, it was dismantled and the entire working still was taken into possession vide memo Exhibit PW1/A. The sample of Lahan and illicit liquor were taken in two separate nips. The case property was sealed with seal impression 'S'. Ruka Exhibit PW6/A was sent for registration of the case on the basis of which FIR Exhibit PW2/A was formally registered.
(3.) THE prosecution led its evidence in proof of the charge and after hearing the parties at the end of the trial, the respondent was acquitted on the ground that the alleged independent witnesses did not support the case of prosecution and the sole testimony of the Investigating Officer was unsafe to sustain the conviction of the respondent and there was no material evidence to show that the respondent in any way connected with the offence charged.