KASHMIRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner initially challenged the conviction of the petitioner on account of some suggested discrepancies in the statements of Head Constable Harjinder Singh and Constable Parkash Chand, the two witnesses who had supported the recovery of 45 bottles of illicit liquor from the possession of the petitioner, contained in a rubber tube. Those discrepancies are so minor that it is difficult to spell out any doubt therefrom. Both the Courts below have given their pointed attention to those discrepancies and held them to be minor. No different view is possible on reconsideration.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner then has prayed for leniency in the matter of sentence. It is noteworthy that the occurrence took place on April 22, 1983, and the petitioner is on bail under orders of this Court dated November 15, 1985. Almost six years are about to elapse. The treat of being incarcerated has been on the petitioner throughout. Keeping that in view, it is ordered that the petitioner may remain at large on probation. Let him execute a bond interms of section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- with one surety of the like amount, operative for a period of two years, binding himself to keep peace and be of good behaviour and further binding himself to come and receive sentence when called upon by the Court to do so. Let the bond be executed within a period of two months from today, before the trial Magistrate. Let the petitioner pay a sum of Rs. 500/- as costs of the prosecution.