IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 2046 of 2004 Date of decision: October 06, 2010 Mohinder Singh .. Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Chaudhary, AAG, Punjab for the respondent. A.N. Jindal, J Assailed in this petition is the judgment dated 17.4.2004 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Ad-hoc), Fast Track Court, Gurdaspur, dismissing the appeal filed by the accused-appellant (herein referred as, 'the accused') against the judgment dated 30.4.1998 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurdaspur, convicting and sentencing him along with four other accused to under go rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs.2000/- each under Section 61 (1) (a) of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 (for brevity, 'the Act'). However, the other co-accused have not preferred any appeal or revision and the present accused only has come up in revision. In nutshell, the allegations are that on 15.5.1991, HC Malkiat Singh along with other police officials was going towards Dhariwal in Government vehicle bearing registration No. PAT 4467 in connection with excise raid. When they reached near old bus stand, they got secret information that one green coloured ambassador car was being used for transporting the illicit liquor. Believing the information to be reliable, the Investigating Officer held picket near Chanan Singh Dian Marian. In the meantime, one car bearing registration No.PND-373 was seen coming from Dhariwal side. On checking of the said suspected car, six plastic cans kept in dicky, two plastic cans kept on the back seat and another two plastic cans lying on the front seat of the car, all containing illicit liquor were recovered. Each can was containing 40 bottles of illicit liquor. One nip was taken out from each can as sample and thereafter, the sample as well as the remaining Criminal Revision No. 2046 of 2004 -2- liquor were sealed with the seal bearing impression 'MS'. Ruqa was sent to the police station on the basis of which formal FIR was registered and investigated. On completion of the investigation, challan against the accused was presented in the court. It is pertinent to mention here that the accused Balwinder Lal and Hira Lal absented themselves during trial and ultimately, they were declared as proclaimed offenders. The other accused were charged under Section 61 (1) (a) of the Act to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution led evidence. Statements of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded in which they denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against them and pleased their false implication in the case. In defence, they examined Patwari Sardari Lal (DW1). The trial ended in conviction. The appeal preferred by the accused Mohinder Singh alone, was also dismissed. Mr. Hitesh Kaplish, Advocate appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist the court has not turned up to argue the petition, therefore, I have no option but to decide the case after going through the impugned judgment. Having examined the impugned judgment, it may be observed that the Appellate Court has dealt with all the points raised before it very elaborately. The accused along with his co-accused (non petitioners) was found in possession of 10 plastic cans and each can containing 40 bottles of illicit liquor for public sale. They could not produce any licence or permit for carrying such a huge quantity of illicit liquor. The evidence has been appreciated in the right perspective. No illegality much less irregularity has been detected or pointed out warranting interference by this court. The judgment passed by the Appellate Court is well reasoned and well founded. No exception could be made to the findings returned by both the courts below. As such, the impugned judgment of conviction is maintained. Resultantly, this revision petition being devoid of any merit is dismissed. October 06, 2010 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge