Illegal possession of opium sustained on seizure evidence and unchallenged testimony; sentence left undisturbed in revision.

Conviction for illegal possession of opium was sustained where the seizure memo, chemical identification of the substance as opium, and the unchallenged testimony of the principal witness together established possession, and there was no material suggesting false implication or animus. The rejection of one supporting witness did not undermine proof of the offence. Revisional interference with sentence was declined because the punishment was not shown to be excessive or harsh, and the sentence was maintained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction for illegal possession of opium under Section 9A of the Opium Act could be sustained on the basis of the evidence on record, and whether the sentence required interference in revision.

Analysis: The prosecution version that the accused was found in possession of about 10 grams of opium was supported by the seizure memo and the report identifying the seized substance as opium. The testimony of the principal witness remained unchallenged, and there was nothing on record to show false implication or animus. The rejection of one supporting witness did not detract from the proof of the offence. The sentence imposed was not shown to be excessive or harsh so as to warrant revisional interference.

Conclusion: The conviction under Section 9A of the Opium Act was upheld and the sentence was also maintained.

---