Criminal Revision No.2454 of 2008 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Criminal Revision No.2454 of 2008 Date of decision: 03.02. 2009 Kulwant Singh ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Pardeep Kumar Bajaj, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Aman Deep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab. **** SABINA, J. Kulwant Singh-petitioner was convicted for an offence under Section 61 (1) (a) of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 (“the Act”- for short) and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs.1,000/- by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Barnala vide judgment dated 24.7.2007. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed vide judgment dated 22.9.2007 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Barnala. Hence, the present revision petition. Criminal Revision No.2454 of 2008 2 Prosecution case, as noticed by the Appellate Court in para 2 of its judgment, is reproduced herein below:- “The facts as put forth by the prosecution are that on 31.3.2005, HC Daljit Singh along with fellow police officials were patrolling and present at bus stand of village Tajoke, at about 7.00 p.m., he received a secret information to the effect that the accused is carrying liquor in a Tata Sumo bearing registration No. HR- 44A/3377 and coming towards to village and if a nakabandi is held, the accused can be apprehended and heavy quantity of liquor can be recovered form him . Relying upon the information, ruqa was recorded and dispatched to the police station and a nakabandi was held at 'T' point of village Rereke Khurd. Meanwhile, the aforesaid vehicle was spotted and it was signaled to stop. The identity of the accused was verified. From the search of the vehicle, 10 boxes of liquor marked DSP were recovered from it. Each box contained 12 bottles 180 ml liquor was taken out as sample from each bottle. The sample parcels and the bottles containing remaining liquor were sealed with the seal bearing impression “:DS” and the incriminating articles were taken into possession vide separate recovery memo”. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the Criminal Revision No.2454 of 2008 3 petitioner has not challenged the conviction of the petitioner under Section 61 of the Act. He has only challenged the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner by the Courts below. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the wife of the petitioner was suffering from a serious disease and was under treatment. Mother of the petitioner was also suffering from neurological disease. He has further submitted that the petitioner has already undergone more than six months of the actual sentence and his sentence of imprisonment be reduced to as already undergone by him. The fine imposed by the trial Court has already been deposited by the petitioner. Keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and examining the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be just and expedient to reduce the sentence of imprisonment of the petitioner to as already undergone by him. Accordingly, the conviction of the petitioner under Section 61 (1) (a) of the Act is maintained. However, the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to as already undergone by him. With this modification, the present revision petition is disposed of. (SABINA) JUDGE February 03, 2009 anita