Jasbir Singh vs State of Haryana

S.S. Dewan. J.

Jasbir Singh petitioner was convicted under Section 61(1)(a) of the Punjab Excise Act and sentenced to six months R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1,000/ or in default to undergo further R.I. for two months by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Karnal, on December 13, 1985 On appeal, the conviction of the petitioner was upheld but the sentence of imprisonment was reduced to three months while maintaining the sentence of fine with its default clause by a lucid and detailed judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal, dated 20th March, 1986, He has now come up by way of revision.

It is unnecessary to recount the facts Mr. K.S. Raipuri appearing for the petitioner could not challenge the testimony of Assistant sub Inspector Daya Nand PW. 2 and Assistant Sub Inspector Vajinder Singh PW3. The fragmentary challenge to the independence of the witnesses was however, made on the ground that they were official witnesses. The Supreme Court has observed a number of times that the official witnesses being disinterested, their testimony cannot be doubted merely on their being official witnesses. The crossexamination directed against these witnesses has not elicited anything worth the name which could possibility make a dent in the prosecution case and I would, therefore, affirm the findings of the Courts below and accept the testimony of these witnesses.

It was next contended on behalf of the petitioner that the case property had not been produced and therefore the prosecution case was clouded with doubt. I find no substance in this contention. It has been held by the Division Bench of this Court in Balraj Singh v. State of Punjab, 1982 Chandigarh Criminal Cases 204 that the mere nonproduction of the case property would not itself vitiate the conviction of the accused. No other point was urged.

In the result, I find no merit in the revision and dismiss the same.