Ladha Singh vs State of Punjab

Sat Pal, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code against the judgment dated 23rd May, 1994, passed by the JMIC and the judgment dated 13th September, 1995, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur.

By judgment, dated 23rd May, 1994, learned trial court convicted the petitioner under section 61(1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/ (in default of payment of fine, the petitioner was to further undergo three months'' R.I.). This judgment was challenged by the petitioner by filing an appeal and the said appeal was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide his judgment dated 13th September, 1995.

Notice of this petition was issued to the AdvocateGeneral Punjab on 6th October, 1995, but the notice was limited only on the point of sentence.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. Mr. Merchea, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is a youngman of 28/29 years and this is his first conviction. He further submits that the petitioner has been facing the trial since 1991 and he has already suffered imprisonment for period of more than two months. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has already deposited Rs. 2500/ against the sentence of fine. The learned counsel contends that the petitioner should be given the benefit under the Probation of Offenders Act and should be released on probation. In support of his contention, the learned counsel placed reliance on two judgments of this court in State of Haryana v. Ramji Lal, 1972 Cr.L.J. 276 and Sadhu Singh v. State of Punjab, 1988(1) Recent CR 703 .

The learned AAG, however, submits that the petitioner was running a distillery and already a lenient view has been taken and the petitioner has been awarded only one years''s R.I.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record and particularly keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has been facing trial for the last over 4 years and this is his first conviction, I am of the view the ends of justice would be met if the substantive sentence is reduced from one year to 4 months. Accordingly, I reduce the substantive sentence awarded to the petitioner from one year to 4 months. The sentence of fine is, however, sustained.

With this modification in the substantive sentence, the revision petition is dismissed.