Amendment status not verified — confirm the current text below against the official source.
Seal. - Investigation Officer did not state that seal of the Excise Inspector on the sample of material recovered from accused was entrusted to an independent witness. Possibility of the having been tampered with. Independent did not support prosecution. Evidence of official witnesses not inspiring confidence. Prosecution case doubtful. Accused acquitted. Police Officer recovering excisable material and sealing the same. There is no statutory requirement to hand over the seal to a third person. Recovery of illicit liquor. Sample sealed by Investigating Officer. Seal not given by Investigating Officer to any other person but kept by him for two days. Possibility of sample being tampered with by Investigating Officer cannot be ruled out. Accused acquitted. Recovery of illicit liquor. Seal used by Police during investigation. Seal whether be given to a third person (No). There is no statutory requirement that seal used by Police should be given to a third person. Recovery of lahan by Police. Excise Inspector reached the Police Station and tested the lahan after breaking the seal of drums. No evidence that Excise Inspector compared the seal with sample seal. The drums when produced in could had no seals thereon which the Excise Inspector alleged to have fixed. Accused acquitted. Recovery of working Still. Seal used by Police to seal the working Still whether should be handed over to a third person immediately. Held, there is no statutory requirement in this respect. Samples sealed by S.l., Police with his own seal. Seal, not satisfactorily entrusted to an independent person. Accused entitled to acquittal. Seal on the sample of illicit liquor recovered not entrusted to an independent person. Inde- pendent person though entrusted with the seal by investigating officer, however, not produced as a witness. Held that this fact 9Y itself cannot affect the merits of the trial. Prosecution case cannot be thrown on this score. Seal used by Police Officer in course of investigation. There is no requirement of law that seal be handed over to a third person forthwith. Since there is no evidence about the seal having been handed over to a disinterested witness, it is not possible for me to say that the sample alleged to have been sent to the Chemical Examiner was of the same material which was alleged to have been recovered from the petitioner. There is one more circumstance which militates against the prosecution. The prosecution is bound to prove that the material recovered from the accused fell within the mischief of the Punjab Excise Act.