GURMUKH SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was convicted under section 61(1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/ - or in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for fifteen days by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Panipat. On appeal, his conviction and sentence was upheld by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal. Hence this revision petition.

(2.) MR . Cheema, learned counsel for the petitioner, has not addressed on merits but prays for the benefit of probation on the ground that the petitioner is a first offender and is a family man.

(3.) I find merit in the contention of Mr. Cheema. There is nothing on the record to show that the petitioner is a previous convict. There is also nothing against his character and antecedents. He is on bail. He was 35 years of age at the time of commission of the crime. In view of the principle of law as laid down in a Full Bench authority of this Court reported as Joginder Singh v. State of Punjab, 1983 P.L.R. 585, prescription of minimum sentence under section 61(1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act is no bar to the grant of benefit of probation to the petitioner. Accordingly, in my view, no useful purpose will be served to commit him to prison again to undergo the unexpired period of his sentence of imprisonment. Ends of justice will be amply met if his conviction is maintained but his sentence of imprisonment and fine is set aside and he is given the benefit of probation. It is ordered accordingly and directed that he shall be released on probation for one year on his entering into a bond in the sum of Rs. 5,000/ - with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of trial Court, undertaking to appear and receive the sentence as and when called upon by the Court to do so during the aforesaid period and in the meantime to keep peace and be of good behaviour.