GAJJAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is filed against the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Zira on the petitioner for an offence under Section 61(1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 as also confirmed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Ferozepur in Criminal Appeal No. 27 of 1986 dated January 17, 1987.

(2.) THE petitioner was prosecuted for an offence under Section 61(1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act on the allegation that the accused was found distilling illicit liquor on April 2, 1984 by the Police Patrolling Party when they were patrolling near village Jhuge Ruknewala. On the basis of the report given by the Head Constable, the case was registered against the accused. A sample of the illicit liquor was drawn and sent to the Chemical Examiner and after completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the accused in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Zira who took the case on file in case No. 753-3. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined three witnesses and marked documents. After closure of the evidence of the prosecution, the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. but he adduced no evidence in defence. On a consideration of the evidence on record, the learned magistrate convicted the accused for an offence under Section 61(1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-. Aggrieved by the said conviction, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Sessions Judge, Ferozepur. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Ferozepur on a consideration of the material on record, confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned magistrate on the petitioner. Against the said order of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Ferozepur the petitioner preferred the above revision petition in this Court.

(3.) THE accused was said to be of 24 years of age at the time of commission of offence. The offence took place on April 2, 1984 i.e. more than ten years back. The accused was in Jail for more than one month. In these circumstances, I am of the opinion that the ends of justice will be met if the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone. I, accordingly, reduce the sentence to the period already undergone while maintaining the sentence of fine. If the accused fails to pay the amount of fine within one month from today, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. Subject to the modification in sentence of imprisonment as indicated above, the revision petition is dismissed. Revision dismissed.