AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
1 paragraphs · 120 words
1.
The second accused left opium contained in a locked-up box in the house of the 1st accused and 1st accused has been convicted u/s 9(c) of Act I of 1878 for being in illegal possession of opium. The only question is whether the 1st accused was in possession of the opium. We think he was. Admittedly he knew there was opium in the box and the box was in his custody in his house. We, therefore, see no reason to interfere with the conviction. We think, however, a fine of Rs. 5 is sufficient penalty in the circumstances of the case and we reduce the fine to that amount. The balance of the fine will be refunded. Fine reduced.