Kuldip Singh alias Fauji vs State of Punjab

S.S. Dewan, J.

Kuldip Singh petitioner was convicted under Section 9(a) of the Opium Act for having been found in possession of 9 kg. of opium and sentenced to 21/2 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/ by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hoshiarpur, on February 26, 1985. On appeal, the learned Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur after elaborately appraising the evidence upheld his conviction but reduced his sentence of imprisonment to one year while maintaining The sentence of fine with its default clause. Being dissatisfied, he has now come up in revision.

It is unnecessary to recount the facts of the case. The counsel for the petitioner has been unable to seriously dislodge the considered findings of the two Courts below. The conviction of the petitioner has been rested primarily on the evidence of Head Constable Sada Ram and Assistant Sub Inspector Jasbir Singh. Both the Courts below have held these witnesses to be completely disinterested and they have not been shown having any hostility or animus against the petitioner to falsely implicate him on a serious charge The learned counsel has primarily challenged the conviction on the ground that the prosecution rests mainly on the official testimony and that in the absence of any corroboration a by a public witness, the conviction cannot be sustained. I am unable to agree The first point deserving notice is that the Investigating Officer has categorically stated that while passing through the village, he did try to join some public witnesses but they were reluctant to join the raiding party. In this context, the nonjoining of a public witness is obviously explained and no adverse inference can be raised against the prosecution on this score. The conviction of the petitioner thus warrants no interference.

Finally, Mr. Kalra urged for the release of the petitioner on probation in terms of Section 360, Criminal Procedure Code. I am of the opinion that beneficiary provisions of Section 360 of the Code cannot be extended to the cases of this kind. Nine Kgs. of opium was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. This offence has assumed a menacing proportion and requires curbing with heavy hands. To release such offenders on their executing of bonds, is to dilute the deterrent effect of the sentence provided in the Act.

In the result, I find nomerit in the revision petition and dismiss the same.