GURDIP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was found in possession of ten bottles of illicit liquor and when he was interrogated on disclosure statement made by him 150 kgs. of Lahan was also recovered. Pursuant to the trial, he was convicted for an offence under Section 61(1)(a) of Punjab Excise Act, 1914 in the matter of recovery of ten bottles of illicit liquor and sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months as also to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- or in default to further undergo R.I. for one month. In the matter of recovery of 150 kgs. of Lahan once against the petitioner was convicted under Section 61(1)(a) of the Punjab Excise Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- or in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for three months. Both these sentences were, however, ordered to run concurrently. The appeal filed by the petitioner met with no success. Hence, the present revision.

(2.) ALL that has been urged in support of the revision by the learned Counsel is that the petitioner has already undergone a protracted trial of 14 years. At the time of commission of crime, the petitioner was 24/25 years of age and that he is a first offender. Even though there may be a minimum sentence of six months for the offence committed by him, it is too well settled the even in such matters, where the minimum sentence is prescribed, the offender can be let off on probation. For his aforesaid contention the Counsel relies upon the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Joginder Singh v. State of Punjab, 1980 Crl.L.J. 1218, which was followed by Single Judge of this Court in Baldev Singh v. State of Haryana, 1985(1) RCR(Crl.) 36 : 1985 CCC 452.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel representing the parties and am of the view that it is not a case of that huge quantity of illicit liquor which may in itself be enough so as not to let off the petitioner on probation. As mentioned above, the petitioner has already undergone protracted trial of 14 years. He is a first offender and was 24/25 years of age at the time of commission of crime. Further, 150 kgs. of Lahan may appear to be huge but it is not disputed that it is only a raw product of which the quantity of illicit liquor may be much less. In the totality of facts and circumstances of this case, while upholding the order of conviction recorded by the Courts below, I reduce the sentence from the one given by the Courts below to direct the petitioner only to furnish a bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- and to keep peace and be of good behaviour for a period of one year under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. The petitioner shall furnish the bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- within one month from the date certified copy of this order is received by him. It requires to be mentioned here that if the petitioner has already paid the fine, it shall not be paid back to him. The revision stands disposed of accordingly. Revision partly allowed.