COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION Vs. CHHINDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two connected revision petitions, namely, Criminal Revision Petition Nos. 1004 and 987 of 1986, arising out of the order passed by Shri Kamaljit Singh Garewal, Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, and necessarily would be disposed of by a common order.

(2.) The petitioner was found guilty of the offence under Section 61(1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act and was awarded two years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default of payment of which further rigorous imprisonment for six months, by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ajnala. On appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, confirmed the order of conviction and reduced the sentence of imprisonment to six months' R.I. and the fine to Rs. 1,000/- in default of payment of which further R.I. for two months. The petitioner was taken into custody on the pronouncement of the order of the Court. Now, while in custody he has approached this Court by means of Criminal Revision No. 987 of 1986. When this was placed for motion hearing before me, I took the view that the learned Judge seemingly had over-looked the provisions of law whereunder the petitioner had to be meted out with a minimum of one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of not less than Rs. 5,000/-. Inevitably, notice for enhancement had to be issued. And this has become Criminal Revision No. 1004 of 1986.

(3.) If the conviction is to be maintained, the petitioner must be awarded one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and, in default of payment of which, further rigorous imprisonment for six months (as ordered by the learned Judicial Magistrate). Since the petitioner has chosen to challenge his conviction, his learned counsel has been heard.