Sahib Singh vs The State of Punjab

K.P.S. Sandhu, J.—The Petitioner was tried, convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs. 5000, in default further rigorous imprisonment for three months u/s 61(1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ajnala, vide his order dated 23rd April, 1980. His conviction and sentence were confirmed by the lower appellate Court. The Petitioner has now come up in revision to this Court.

Mr. M.L. Sarin, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the solitary witness of the public, namely, Balbir Singh joined by the police was given up to as won over. However, the plea of the Petitioner was that he had in fact been involved in this case at the instance of Balbir Singh with whom he had standing enmity. In defence he produced Harbans Lal DW 1 and Bhan Singh DW 2 who stated that there had been along-standing dispute between Balbir Singh and the Petitioner. The father of the Petitioner had appeared against Balbir Singh in a mutation case. The learned lower appellate court did not give any valid reason to discard the evidence of the defence witnesses. In fact, it would have been proper on the part of the prosecution to produce 0albir Singh in Court and allow the defence to cross examine him. The mere statement of the prosecutor that he has been won over would not be of any avail since a definite plea was taken by the Petitioner that he had been involved in this case at the instance of Balbir Singh with whom he had a long-standing enmity. Consequently I am of the view that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the Petitioner beyond a shadow of doubt. Consequently I allow the revision, acquit the Petitioner of the charge against him and set aside his sentence. The fine, if recovered, would be refunded to him.