TARA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision was admitted only with regard to sentence

(2.) Tata Singh, aged 35 years. was convicted under section 61 (1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act by Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ajnala, vide,order dated 9-7-1987. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and three months and a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. In default of payment of fine he was ordered to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. He filed an appeal, which was dismissed both with regard to conviction and sentence by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar vide order dated 11-12-1987.

(3.) Learned counsel for the revision petitioner argued that in the facts and circumstances of the can the benefit of probation should be given to the petitioner. He pointed out that the accused was first offender. He was the sole earning member of the family comprising his wife and children besides aged parents. He also submitted that the accused hid already undergone five months, two days sentence. Reference was made to two decisions of this Court, in which benefit of probation was given in cases under section 61 (1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act . These are Sucha Singh v.The State of Punjab, 1982 C.C. Cases 291 (HC)and Dharam Singh v. The State of Punjab,1984 1 CurLR 132. In both these cases, the accused was released on probation inter alia on the ground of age of the convict. In the case first, above cited, age of the convict was more than 70 years and in the second case mentioned above it was 22 years. In the case in hand, the age of the convict is about 35 years. It is well known that illicit distillation is on the increase. The offence of illicit distillation affect the interest of the society in general. The offences are difficult to detect and after considering the facts and circumstances, I do not think that any case for releasing the offender on probation has been made out. However, a small relief can be given to the petitioner in the matter of imprisonment. His sentence of imprisonment is reduced to one year, the minimum prescribed by law. There is no alteration in the amount of fine or imprisonment in default of payment of fine.