IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.2778 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: November 09, 2011 Chanan Singh @ Channa ...Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr.Sidakneet Sandhu, Advocate, for Mr.S.P.S.Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. One year is the minimum sentence provided under Section 61(1)(c) of the Excise Act, where the allegation is of accused having been caught with the working `still'. The submission that no independent witness was joined would not impress me as in such cases it is difficulty to look for independent witnesses when working still is to be raided and the police can not be expected to look for independent witness. No allegations are made against the police for false implication. The evidence as led has sufficiently been discussed and duly considered. Not a fit case for interference. Dismissed. November 09, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE