AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
3 paragraphs · 194 wordsK.P.S. Sandhu, J.(Oral)
The petitioner was tried, convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs. 1000, indefault further rigorous for two months, under section 61(1) (a) of the Punjab Excise Act by the trial Magistrate. His conviction and sentence were upheld by the lower appellate Court. The petitioner has come up in revision in this Court. The same was admitted by Pritpal, J. vide his order dated 12th July, 1984.
Mr. R.S. Ghai, learned counsel for the petitioner, has not addressed me on the merits. He submits that the petitioner has been facing the trial since 1982 and that he has been on bail since July, 1984. Therefore, he prays that reduction in the sentence is called for. I think that a case for the imposition of a lesser sentence than the minimum prescribed under the law is made out. Consequently I reduce the sentence of imprisonment of the petitioner to the period already undergone, which is about one month. However, the sentence of fine and of imprisonment in lieu thereof would remain undisturbed. But for this modification this revision petition fails and is hereby dismissed.