TILAK RAJ Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a criminal revision petition directed against the judgment and order of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu dated 30th September, 1982 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 18 of 1980 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has maintained the conviction and sentence passed under section 48 Excise Act as recorded by learned Judicial Megistrate, Sub -Registrar, Jammu on 17th October, 1980, with the only modification that the fine of Rs.4,000/ - imposed by the trial court was reduced to Rs.500/ - but the rigrous imprisfonment of one year was maintained.

(2.) SHORN of details, the case of prosecution is that the appellant was trading in Norcotics and was having considerable quantity of Charas Opium in his possession. On receiving such information in Police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu, the concerned Police Officer rushed to raid the house of the petitioner. Before making such raid, he sought presence of some witnesses of that area who were residing in the neighborhood of the petitioner and in their presence entered the house of the petitioner and recovered 2 Kilograms and 4 grams of Opium and 1.350 grams of charas from an Almirah, which was kept in the residential room of the petitioner. The almirah was unlocked:lt contained soap cakes and beneath them illegal Charas and Opium was stored. However, in accordance with the procedure established by law, he seized both the items there and then produced it before the Magistrate and, thereafter, it was sent to the Chemical Examiner and even the seal was also produced before the court. Report of the chemical Examiner after due examination was received who certified that the parcels contained Opium and Charas, hence the challan was produced before the Judicial Magistrate, Sub -Registrar, Jammu who, after recording evidence and hearing the parties convicted the petitioner under section 48 Excise act and sentenced him to one years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.4,000/ -. This judgment and Order dated 17th October, 1980 was appealed against in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu who, after hearing the parties and going through the record, maintained the conviction -and sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment, but reduced the fine to Rs.500/ -only.

(3.) THE judgment of learned Sessions Judge is assailed here on various grounds: firstly on the ground that the courts below have erred in convicting the petitioner on the sole testimony of the Investigating officer. However, the eye witness did not support the prosecution version and were declared hostile, It has been contended that even the statement of the I.O. is not devoid of self -contradictions. Samples were not duly sent to the Chemical Examiner and the Opium and Charas has not been identified. Thirdly, the trial court has not afforded reasonable opportunity to the appellant to adduce evidence in defence.