Laxman vs State of Haryana

K.P.S. Sandhu, J. (Oral)

By way of this revision Laxman son of Ram Lal has challenged his conviction and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for three months and a fine of Rs. 500/, in default, further rigorous imprisonment for one month, under Section 61(1)(a) of the Punjab Excise Act.

On 25th April, 1983, a police party headed by Head Constable Hawa Singh received a secret information that the petitioner was a habitual distiller of liquor and seller of the same. The house of the petitioner was raided. He was present in front of his house and was having a plastic jerrican in his right hand. He was apprehended and it was found that the jerrican contained illicit liquor. The same was transferred into 4/12 bottle. A sample out of the same was sent to the Chemical Examiner. According to the report of the Chemical Examiner, the liquor was found to be of illicit origin.

The prosecution evidence consists of the statements of Jai Narain Head Constable and Hawa Singh Head Constable. In spite of prehand secret information, Head Constable Hawa Singh did not care to join any member of the public for reasons best known to him although it is in evidence that quite a number of persons were available.

The prosecution version on the face of it looks highly improbable and appears to be a madeup affair. As per the evidence, when the police party went to the house of the petitioner, he was found standing in front of his house with a jerrycan in his hand containing illicit liquor as if he was there to receive the police party. I have gone through the statements of the two police witness and fined quite a number of discrepancies therein. In this view of the matter, I do not think that it can be said that the case against the petitioner stands proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Consequently, I gave the petitioner the benefit of doubt and acquit him of the charge. The fine, if recovered, would be refunded to the petitioner.