All the prosecution witnesses have testified that the same was filled up by PW3.
P.C. Learned companynsel for appellants reiterated the submissions made before the High Court.
All of them testified as to recovery of the samples.
Eighteen cartons companytaining 12 bottles of Bonnie Scot Special Malt Whisky, each being an 750 ml bottle, were recovered.
The appellants were arrayed as accused and arrested.
380 OF 2008 Arising out of SLP Crl.
The seal was handed over to Head Constable Satpal Singh.
The High Court found that there was numbersubstance in the plea.
An FIR was lodged and a site plan was prepared.
The appellants were charged with having companymitted offence under Section 61 of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 in short the Act .
The seal after use was handed over to PW1.
The prosecution alleged that upon receipt of information, S.I. Lalit Mohan, alongwith certain police officials, companystituted a raiding party, assembled near a traffic intersection and on 8.4.1994 at about 1.45 A.M. intercepted a Tata 407 vehicle in which the appellants were travelling.
The heads of the samples bottles were enclosed in White Pullanda and sealed with the letters LMN.
It was numbered that there was numbernecessity for examining any witness to prove the Excise Control Laboratory report as documents were marked in terms of Section 293 Cr.
They stood trial pleading number guilty.
P.C. The Metropolitan Magistrate i.e., the Trial Court by judgment and order dated 1.5.2001 found the appellants guilty and sentenced them to six months simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/ and in default a further three months simple imprisonment.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows The appellants were alleged to have been indulging in smuggling of liquor from Haryana to Delhi.
They however, denied the accusations through statements under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 in short the Cr.
Form M 29 was also filled.
The Excise Control Laboratory opined that the samples submitted tested positive as Whisky.
These were tallied with the specimen seal of M29 when the Excise Control Laboratory sealed them.
Despite being signalled to stop, the vehicle sped away.
The police officials chased it, and stopped it and apprehended the appellants.
No.2214 of 2007 Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
The appeal preferred by the petitioners to the Additional Sessions Judge was dismissed by order dated 22.2.2006.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.
The only stand before the High Court was that there was delay in dispatch of the sample and numbere was examined to prove the reports.
The prosecution examined three witnesses.
Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court dismissing the revision petition filed by the appellants.
Two sample bottles were taken out separately as samples and from each carton i.e., 36 bottles .
By the revision petition challenge was to the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi, upholding the companyviction and sentence imposed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate.
Referring to the evidence of SI PW3 and PW1 about the sealing and sending samples to the Excise Control Laboratory, it was numbered that the Form M 29 was filled up by PW 2 at the time of recovery.
