Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 789 (PNJ)

Bakshi Singh v. State Of Punjab

2005-07-27

M.M.AGGARWAL

body2005
Judgment M.M.Aggarwal, J. 1. This revision was filed by Bakshi Singh and Amar Singh who had been convicted under Section 9 of the Opium Act by Shri Balbir Singh, Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jagraon and were sentenced to three years RI and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each. Bakshi Singh and Amar Singh had filed appeal against that judgment which was dismissed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Ludhiana on 12.10.1989. The present revision petition has been filed against that judgment. 2. The case against the petitioners is that on the night intervening 8th and 9th October, 1983 Inspector Raj Kishan of CIA Staff, Ludhiana, SI Sant Singh, SHO, Jagraon, ASI Sant Kumar, Constable Hari Mitter and some other police officials were holding a Nakabandi at the point where the link road leading to Nanaksar bifurates from Jagraon-Moga highway. At about 2.15 A.M. a truck bearing No. PBM 3565 came from the side of Nanaksar which was intercepted by the police party. Major Singh son of Santa Singh was owner of the truck and Gurdip Singh son of Bakshi Singh was sitting on the tool-box of the truck. They jumped from the back side of the truck and made good their escape. Amar Singh accused was driver and Bakshi Singh was seated in the driver chamber behind the drivers seat. The truck was searched. Two bags containing opium were recovered from the took box underneath the seats of the driver Amar Singh and that of Bakshi Singh. In all 126 Kgs of opium was recovered. Amar Singh and Bakshi Singh were arrested at the spot whereas other persons were arrested on 15.7.1983 and thereafter were challaned for offence under Section 9 of the Opium Act after due investigation. 3. During trial, prosecution had examined Inspector Raj Kishan PW-1 and ASI Sant Kumar PW-2 as investigating officer and as witnesses of the recovery. Affidavits and Chemical Examiner Report had been tendered. Only Amar Singh and Bakshi Singh were convicted and sentenced as aforesaid. Appeal filed by them had been dismissed. 4. Counsel for the petitioners had argued that it was a false case and actually Major Singh and Gurdip Singh were the culprits who had been acquitted. 5. In this case, Bakshi Singh and Amar Singh had been arrested at the spot. Amar Singh was driving the truck whereas Bakshi Singh was sitting by his side. 4. Counsel for the petitioners had argued that it was a false case and actually Major Singh and Gurdip Singh were the culprits who had been acquitted. 5. In this case, Bakshi Singh and Amar Singh had been arrested at the spot. Amar Singh was driving the truck whereas Bakshi Singh was sitting by his side. Recovery had been effected from the tool-box underneath seats on which Bakshi Singh and Amar Singh were sitting. Recovery had been as much as 126 Kgs of opium and police officials possibly would have no motive to plant this much of opium against the petitioners. 6. Counsel for the petitioners lastly argued that recovery had been effected as far back as on 9.7.1983. At that time, Bakshi Singh was 70 years of age whereas Amar Singh was 50 years of age. They are convicted on 5.12.1988 and even their appeal had been dismissed as long back as on 12.10.1989 and that lenient view should be taken. 7. In this case, recovery had been very heavy. However, the accused petitioners had been tried for offence under Section 9 of the Opium Act where there is the maximum sentence of three years. Sentence of three years and a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default 6 months RI had been awarded in this case. Since recovery was effected 22 years back, conviction had been recorded 17 years back and even appeal dismissed 16 years back, I take lenient view and reduce the substantive sentence from three years to two years RI for both Bakshi Singh and Amar Singh petitioners. They will, however, be liable to undergo imprisonment as awarded by the trial Court in default of fine. 8. With this modification, the appeal fails and is dismissed.