SARJEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Judical Magistrate No. 2, Sri Ganganagar by his judgment dated May 19, 1985 convicted the accused petitioner Sarjeet Singh for the offence under Sections 54 (a), 54 (c) and 54 (d) of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 and sentenced him to six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/ - and in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month on the first count, one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 300/ - and in default rigorous imprisonment for two months for the second count and six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/ - and in default of payment of fine to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month on the third count. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. An appeal was filed and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar by his judgment dated November 18, 1985 maintained the conviction and sentences awarded by the Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Sri Ganganagar. Hence this revision.

(2.) MR . Mridul Jain, appearing for the petitioner does not question correctness of the conviction of the petitioner for the aforesaid offences. He however, submits that the learned Additional Sessions Judge should have given the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act to the accused petitioner. He has invited attention to the decisions in Hazari v. State of Rajasthan 1978 RCC 224, Jagta Ram v. State of Rajasthan 1981 RCC 1, Rameshwar v. State of Rajasthan 1985(4) Crime 63, and Prem v. State 1985(1) Crime 839, wherein benefit of Section 360 Cr. PC was given to the accused persons for the offence under Sections 54(c) and 54(d) of the Act. In Bishnudeo Shaw v. The State of West Bengal : 1979CriLJ841 it was observed by their Lordship as under; - -.if no previous offence is proved against the offender and if it appears to the Court having regard to the age, character and antecedents of the offender, and to the circumstances in which, the offence was committed that it is expedient that the offender should be released on probation of good conduct or after admonition.

(3.) IT was further observed as follows: In the context of Section 360, the 'special reasons' contemplated by Section 361 must be such as to compel the Court to hold that it is to rehabilitate the offender after examining the matter with due regard to the age, character and antecedents of the offender and the circumstances in which the offence was committed.