Criminal Revision No.1476 of 2001 -1- .... IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.1476 of 2001 Date of decision:- 9.12.2010 Ravail Singh ......Petitioner versus Assistant Collector of Customs ......Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: - Mr.A.S. Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. H.P.S. Ghuman, Advocate, for the respondent. .... A.N.JINDAL, J (ORAL) The petitioner has assailed the judgment dated 03.09.2001 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Amritsar, dismissing the appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.09.1998 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar, convicting and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962, and to pay a fine of ` 10,000/- . Brief facts of the case are that on 22.08.1991 it was noticed that a bullock cart was moving on the Pakistani track. The cart puller stopped it and threw something towards the Indian side which was picked up by Kashmira Singh accused and he buried that article under the earth. The B.S.F. Personnel checked and recovered 100 gold biscuits of foreign origin. The spot interrogation of Kashmira Criminal Revision No.1476 of 2001 -2- .... Singh revealed that some more gold biscuits were with Sukhwinder Singh. Consequently, 100 gold biscuits were recovered from Sukhwinder Singh also. Sukhwinder Singh in his statement disclosed that the gold biscuits actually belonged to Ravail Singh-petitioner and he was to get ` 3000/- for this job. Kashmira Singh also corroborated the version of Sukhwinder Singh. Since Ravail Singh had participated in the smuggling of 200 gold biscuits. Case was registered against him and investigated. Completion of the investigation was followed by a report under Section 173 Cr. P.C. He was charged, tried and ultimately convicted and sentenced accordingly. His appeal also failed. Without assailing the judgment of conviction, the learned counsel for the petitioner has urged for extending some leniency on the quantum of sentence. Even otherwise, on scrutiny of the impugned judgment, it transpires that the evidence led by the prosecution appears to have been appreciated in the right perspective. No such illegality much less perversity was found or detected which may render the judgment as invalid, therefore, the findings returned by the Courts below regarding conviction stand affirmed. Now coming to the quantum of sentence, it is noticed that the occurrence took place way back in the year 1991. The petitioner has already suffered a lot of agony due to pendency of proceedings for such a long time in various Courts. He has already undergone some period of the substantive sentence. Under these Criminal Revision No.1476 of 2001 -3- .... circumstances, it would be in the fitness of things to reduce the sentence to some extent. Resultantly, this petition is dismissed with the modification in the sentence, which is reduced to three years without any alteration in the sentence of fine. Copy of the order be sent to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar for compliance. (A.N.JINDAL) JUDGE 09.12.2010 neetu