Crl. Revision No. 1379 of 2002 {1} In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Revision No. 1379 of 2002 Date of Decision:April 23, 2009 Babu Ram ---Petitioner versus State of Haryana ---Respondent Coram: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA *** Present: Mr. Dhirender Chopra and Mr.Bhag Singh,Advocates, for the petitioner Mr. Sidharth Sarup, AAG, Haryana *** SABINA, J. Babu Ram-petitioner was convicted under Sections 61 of the Excise Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) vide judgment dated 10.9.2001 passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ambala City. Vide order dated 11.9.2001 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ambala City, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and a fine of Rs.5000/- for offence under Section 61 of the Act. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed vide judgment dated 12.7.2002 by the Additional Sessions Judge(I), Ambala City. Hence, the present revision petition. The case of the prosecution, as noticed by the Appellate Court Crl. Revision No. 1379 of 2002 {2} in para No.2 of its judgment, is reproduced herein below:- “The prosecution case put in brief is as under:- On 18.3.1998 at about 1.15 A.M. appellant/accused riding the motor cycle bearing No. HR01E-0146 was found in possession of a bag containing 150 pouches of liquor of brand Gulab, by a patrol police party headed by ASI Fateh Singh near Hari Cinema, Ambala City; fifteen pouches were separated as samples and were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory per procedure. Rest of the contraband was also sealed separately in a bag and was taken in possession vide memo Ex. PW1/A. Case property was later deposited with Mohirar, Head Constable of the police station. There was one pillion rider who managed to escape. Information (Ex. PW6/A) was sent to the police Station for registration of a case under Section 61 of the Act. FIR Ex. PW6/E was registered against the accused. He was arrested and later released on bail by the Court. Investigations were conducted. Site plan was prepared. Statements of the witnesses were recorded. Final report was submitted, copies of which were supplied to the accused per procedure under Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.” Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of arguments, has not challenged the conviction of the petitioner under Sections 61 of the Act awarded by the Courts below, but has submitted that Crl. Revision No. 1379 of 2002 {3} the petitioner be ordered to be released on probation by giving him the benefit of provisions of Offenders Act,1958 Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on Sultan Singh v. State of Punjab, 2004(4) RCR( Criminal) 328 and Paul George vs. State of NCT of Delhi (SC) 2008 (2)RCR (Criminal) 478. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner was a Government employee and was the only bread earner of the family. Although as per the evidence on record, 150 pouches of liquor were allegedly recovered from the possession of the petitioner yet the exact quantity of the same was not proved on record. Petitioner is facing criminal proceedings since the year 1998. The object of releasing an accused on probation is that he may be given an opportunity to reform himself. The benefit of probation can be denied only to hardened criminals or where restriction has been imposed by Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.. The petitioner is not a previous convict and has got a family to support. Each case has to be dealt with on its own facts and benefit of probation can neither be granted or declined as a matter of rule. The petitioner is suffering the criminal proceedings since the year 1998. Accordingly, the conviction of the petitioner as ordered by the Courts below under Section 61 of the Act is maintained. However, the sentence qua imprisonment as imposed by the Courts below is set aside. The petitioner is ordered to be released on probation for a period of one year subject to his furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. It is further directed that the petitioner shall keep peace and will be of good behaviour Crl. Revision No. 1379 of 2002 {4} during the period of probation. The fine deposited by the petitioner be treated as costs of proceedings. The petitioner is directed to furnish the bonds within one month from today, failing which, this petition shall stand dismissed. Petition is disposed of accordingly. (SABINA) JUDGE April 23, 2009 PARAMJIT