SURINDER SINGH, J. - (1.) AMRIK Singh petitioner was convicted by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Zira under Section 9 of the Opium Act, and was sentenced to two years Rigorous Imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/ -, in default of payment of fine to undergo further Rigorous Imprisonment for two months. The appeal filed by him against the aforesaid conviction and sentence was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepore. At the time of the Motion hearing of the present Revision Petition, Notice was ordered to be issued only in regard to sentence.
(2.) THE prosecution allegation, briefly stated, is that on January 29, 1983, a police party was on patrol duty. When they reached near the Canal Minor Bridge in the area of Gata Badshah, the petitioner along with another person named Jit Singh came from the side of the river. On seeing the Police Party, both of them tried to retrace their steps. The petitioner was, however, apprehended and as a result of his personal search, opium weighing 10 kgs was found in a cotton bag which he carried on his shoulder. A sample of the article was obtained which on subsequent analysis revealed to be opium.
(3.) IN so far as the conviction of the petitioner under Section 9 of the Opium Act is concerned, the same is fully substantiated from the evidence of Baldev Singh, Constable (PW -1) and Balbir Singh, Head Constable (PW -2) Nothing adverse can be said in regard to the testimony of these witnesses. The conviction of the petitioner under Section 9 of the Opium Act is, therefore, well -based and is affirmed. As regards the sentence, it has been pleaded that the petitioner is a youngman and a first offender. Indeed, the quantity of opium is heavy, but there is nothing to show as to what was the actual strength of the recovered article. It is commonly known that opium is adulterated with some other edible substance with a view to increase its quantity. Apart from this consideration, the petitioner has by now undergone about 2 -1/2 months confinement even after the dismissal of his appeal by the Additional Sessions Judge. He must have also undergone some confinement during investigation and after his conviction by the trial Court. Taking into consideration all the circumstances of the case, the sentence of imprisonment of the petitioner is reduced to six months Rigorous Imprisonment. However, the sentence of fine of Rs. 1,000/ - and two months Rigorous Imprisonment in default of payment thereof, are maintained.;