SETH, J. - (1.) THE applicant has been convicted of an offence under Section 60 (a), Excise Act, for having been found in possession of certain quantity of Ganja without licence for its possession.
(2.) LEARNED counsel has attacked the conviction mainly on the ground that the search was illegal.
(3.) IN several cases I have refused to interfere with the orders of the Court below on the ground that the provisions of Section 103, Criminal Procedure Code, were not strictly observed, because I was satisfied in all those cases that the accused had not been prejudiced by a disregard of those provisions of law. At the same time all those cases have produced an indelible impression upon my mind that the provisions of Section 103, Criminal Procedure Code, which are very salutary provisions for the protection of the interests of an accused person are generally observed, more in their breach than in their compliance, by the police of these provinces. It appears to me that it is high time that steps should be taken to stop this wanton disregard of statutory provisions by the police of these provinces. Neither of the two search witnesses in this case can be regarded to be a witness of the locality. Search witness, Jagannath Singh was the driver of the motor truck which took the raiding party from the police station to the house of the accused. He is certainly not a resident of the village where the raid was made. It is not known how far his native village is from the place which was searched. It is also not known how far the place where be works for his living is from that village. The other search witness, Sripati, is also a resident of a different village.;