MOOL CHAND Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI J.C. Aggarwal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge Faridkot, while releasing the petitioner on probation under section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, ordered him to pay Rs. 4,500/ - as costs of the proceedings. The petitioner was tried for offence under section 9 of the Opium Act for being found in possession of about 4 -1/2 Kgs. of opium. The order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge has been challenged on the ground that the costs are excessive. One is left guessing as to what yardstick has the learned Judge applied in fixing the quantum of costs at Rs. 4,500/ -. Did the prosecution really have to incur as much financial burden in order to prosecute the petitioner ? Was the learned actuated in an indirect way to impose fine of this measure ? Was it meant to be exemplary ? All these questions defy answer. Costs have to be reasonable, proper and not excessive depending on the facts and circumstances of each case. Now here things speak for themselves. Costs are far too excessive than to bother and the expense involved for bringing the petitioner to book. A sum of Rs. 500/ - as costs should have sufficed. Thus, the costs are reduced to Rs. 500/ -.

(2.) THE learned Judge had converted fine of Rs. 1000/ - paid by the petitioner towards costs adjustment. Now, a sum of Rs. 500/ - therefrom shall have to be refunded to the petitioner. It is so ordered. The petitioner stands incarcerated on account of non -payment of costs. He is ordered to be released forthwith. The revision is accepted petition on the aforesaid terms. Petition accepted.