IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.593 of 2005 Date of Decision 03.03.2010 Birru Singh ...... Petitioner(s) VERSUS State of Punjab ...... Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Ms.Ranjana Salaria, Advocate, as Amicus Curiae, for the petitioner. Mr.C.S.Brar, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. ***** A.N.JINDAL, J(ORAL): This petition is directed against the judgment dated 14.02.2005, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Bathinda, dismissing the appeal of the petitioner against the judgment dated 21.07.2004, passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Bathinda, convicting and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- under Section 61 (i)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act. Allegations against the petitioner are that on 08.10.2000, on raid being conducted, he was found operating the working still and was also in possession of 80 kgs of lahan. The articles used in the operation of working still were taken into possession from him. Ultimately, he was charged, convicted and sentenced accordingly. His appeal also failed. Without assailing the judgment of conviction, learned counsel for the petitioner has urged for extending some leniency on the quantum of sentence. On scrutiny of the records, it transpires that the occurrence took place way back in the year 2000. The petitioner has already suffered a lot of Criminal Revision No.593 of 2005 -2- agony due to the pendency of proceedings in the Courts for the last 10 years. Custody certificate, produced by learned State counsel, reveals that the petitioner has already undergone 2 months 21 days of the substantive sentence. Under these circumstances, it would be in the fitness of things to extend some leniency on the quantum of sentence. Under these peculiar circumstances, this petition is dismissed with the modification in the sentence to that of already undergone. However, the sentence of fine is enhanced to Rs.10,000/-, to be paid within three months from today, failing which this petition shall be treated as dismissed in toto. Copy of the order be sent to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bathinda, for compliance. Amicus Curiae would be at liberty to claim the remuneration from the concerned authorities as per rules. (A.N.Jindal) Judge 03.03.2010 mamta-II