Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 144 (PNJ)

Banarsi Das Alias Chhotu v. The State Of Punjab

2000-02-07

AMAR DUTT

body2000
Judgment Amar Dutt, J. 1. Banarsi Dass has filed the present revision against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, by which, while upholding the conviction, the sentence was reduced from 2-1/2 years to 1-1/2 years R.I. and fine of Rs. 2500/- to Rs. 1500/- and in default of payment of fine, the petitioner was required to undergo a further imprisonment of 4 months. 2. The petitioner had been apprehended by ASI Gurmail Singh of Police Station Division `C Amritsar, on 21.8.1982 when he tried to slip away on seeing the police party which was patrolling the area between Bhagtanwala and Mule Chak. His apprehension had lead to the recovery of 11 kgs of opium and after completion of investigation, challan was presented against him in the trial Court. The petitioner was tried for offence under Section 9 of the Opium Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the prosecution had examined HC Surjit Singh and SI Gurmej Singh. Besides, relying upon Ex. PE the report of the Chemical Examiner and affidavits given by the formal witnesses, the trial Court, after finding the charge proved against the petitioner, had rejected the petitioners prayer for being released on probation. Upon appeal meeting the same fate, the petitioner has filed the present revision. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4. Sh. Pandey has not been able to show me any circumstance which would enable this Court to upset the concurrent findings recorded by the Courts below regarding the complicity of the petitioner in the commission of the offence under Section 9 of the Act. In the absence of this, it would not be possible for this Court to arrive at a different conclusion than the one arrived at by the Courts below on the basis of the evidence which the prosecution had lead to bring home the charge. 5. The plea that the petitioner should be released on probation on account of the fact that he has already faced the ordeal of the trial for sufficiently long period too has to be rejected. The petitioner was found carrying 11 kgs of opium. 5. The plea that the petitioner should be released on probation on account of the fact that he has already faced the ordeal of the trial for sufficiently long period too has to be rejected. The petitioner was found carrying 11 kgs of opium. Since it is not the case of the petitioner that he was carrying opium for his own consumption, it can only be inferred that the same was to be sold to illicit consumers which would necessarily encourage them to the vice of drug abuse, which is eating into the entrails of modern society. The Court can also not loose sight that in NDPS Act, the Legislature has keeping in view the serious repercussions both on the physical health of the citizens and economy of the Country, increased the punishment to a minimum of ten years. Taking all these factors into consideration, I do not deem it to be a fit case in which the petitioner should be granted probation. His bail bonds are cancelled and he be taken into custody for undergoing the remaining sentence. This revision petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.