Nanak @ Kaddul vs State of Punjab

S.D. Bajaj, J.

Convicted accused petitioner Nanak was found working a still for the manufacture of illicit liquor inside the residential house in village Nawan Pind of Amritsar District of Punjab State on January 12, 1984. On being prosecuted for it under Section 61 (i)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act No. 1 of 1984 the accused pleaded `not guilty'' thereto and claimed to be tried. Vide its impugned judgment dated January 27, 1986 learned trial Court convicted Nanak of the offence with which he stood charged and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one and a half years and to pay Rs. 5000/ as fine. In default of payment of fine, the accused was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 1986 filed against it before the learned lower Appellate Court was dismissed on March 31, 1986. Criminal Revision No. 586 of 1986 is directed against the impugned judgments of the learned two courts below.

I have heard Sh. A.S. Kalra, Advocate for the petitioner, Shri S.S. Kang, DAG Punjab for the respondent and have perused the relevant material on record very carefully.

It has repeatedly been held by this Court in Raghbir Singh and another v. The State of Haryana, 1990(1) Chandigarh Law Reporter 695; State of Punjab v. Gurmej Singh, 1991(2) Recent Criminal Reports 361 ; State of Punjab v. Gurnam Singh, 1991(3) Recent Criminal Reports 4122 and Gurvel Singh v. The State of Punjab, 1992(1) Recent Criminal Reports 114 that failure of the Investigating Officer to join independent witnesses of the locality in investigation sounds the death knell of the prosecution case set up against accused, conviction based by the learned trial Court on the statements of the police and excise officials cannot be sustained and the accused is entitled to secure an acquittal on this score. In line with the ratio of the decisions aforesaid conviction of accused Nanak in the present case also falls through and has to be set aside.

Affidavits Ex. PF Jaspal Singh and Ex. PG of Kashmir Singh constituting link evidence in the case are not duly verified and have, therefore, to be excluded from consideration. In this view of the matter link evidence is thus missing. It was again held by this Court in Resham Singh v. The State of Punjab, 1981 Chandigarh Law Reporter 314 and Gurvel Singh v. The State of Punjab, 1992(1) Recent Criminal Reports 114 that omission to produce link evidence aforesaid is again fatal to the prosecution case.

Another interesting feature of the case is that when the articles of still were produced in Court, they did not bear identification marks. The boiler was not fit for use and in the plastic can there was no liquor. It was obviously the duty of the prosecution to have kept the material exhibits of the case intact till they were produced in Court.

For the legal infirmities aforesaid, Criminal Revision No. 586 of 1986 succeeds and is allowed. Accused Nanak is given the benefit of doubt and acquitted. The accused is on bail from this Court vide order dated May 6, 1986. Bail bond furnished by his surety and the personal bond put in by the accusedpetitioner himself before the learned trial Court shall both stand discharged.