IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.166 of 1992 Date of decision: January 06, 2010 Kaka Singh @ Budhu .. Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Bipan Ghai, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Gahlawat, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. C.S. Brar, DAG, Punjab for the respondent. A.N. Jindal, J The accused-petitioner Kaka Singh @ Budhu (herein referred as 'the petitioner') has challenged the judgment dated 8.2.1992 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Barnala, dismissing his appeal against the judgment dated 10.2.1988 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Barnala, convicting him under Section 9(a) of the Opium Act and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.200/-. In nut shell the prosecution case is that on 23.3.1985, SI Sudesh Kumar along with other police officials, while travelling in Government Jeep bearing registration No.PBS-1717 was passing by the side of village Kotduna towards village Pandhar and when he reached on the canal bridge, they spotted the petitioner coming and on seeing the police party, he tried to slip away. On suspicion, he was apprehended. On his search as per rules, he was found in possession of 8 kgs of opium wrapped in a glaze paper contained in a gunny bag which he was carrying on his head. After drawing sample of 10 grams, the sample as well as the remaining opium was converted into parcels and parcel Ex.P1 was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PA. Ruqa Ex.PB was sent to the police station on the basis of which formal FIR Ex.PB/1 was recorded. On receipt of the report from the Chemical Examiner Ex.PE, containing opinion that the stuff contained morphine to the extent of 2.40% and also the meconic acid, the petitioner Criminal Revision No.166 of 1992 -2- was challaned. The petitioner was charged and tried. In his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. he denied the allegations and pleaded his false implication. Ultimately he was convicted and sentenced accordingly. Arguments heard. Record perused. Mr. Bipan Ghai, Sr. Advocate has vehemently contended that no independent witness was examined, therefore, no reliance could be placed outrightly on the testimony of the official witnesses, as such, the case against the petitioner could not be said to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. The case lacks corroboration from any independent source. Having heard the contention, the same lack merit. The official witnesses namely SI Sudesh Kumar (PW1) and HC Gurnam Singh (PW2) have consistently testified about the time, place and the manner in which the recovery of 8 kgs of opium was effected from the petitioner. No such discrepancy has been pointed out so as to challenge their credibility and trustworthiness. The official witnesses are as good witnesses as the independent one. They had no ill-will, malice or enmity against the petitioner for implicating him in this case. The link evidence is complete in the case. Both the courts below while accepting the testimony of the witnesses have concurrently upheld the guilt of the petitioner, therefore, the powers of intervention by this court are very limited in nature. Only perversity, arbitrariness or deviation from the possible view are the points for invoking the provisions under Section 401 of Cr.P.C. but no such illegality much less irregularity has been pointed out so as to invite this court for interference. Consequently, finding no merit in the petition the same is dismissed. January 06, 2010 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge