Criminal Revision No.845 of 1989 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: February 1, 2008 Daljit Singh … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Sh.Pawan Kumar Goklaney, Advocate for the petitioner. Sh.Mehardeep Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the State. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (Oral) Daljit Singh son of Ujjagar Singh, in a raid conducted by Excise officials on the basis of secret information, was found distilling illicit liquor through a working still. The incident, in the present case is of 5th October, 1984. The Court of Judicial Magistrate (1st Class), Ferozepur 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.5000/-. In default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. Petitioner had instituted an appeal. The same was also dismissed on September 12, 1989. Instant revision of the petition was admitted on September 20, 1989 and he was ordered to be released on bail. Thus, the petitioner has undergone 8 days of his sentence. Criminal Revision No.845 of 1989 2 Mr.Goklaney has prayed that the sentence should be reduced to already undergone. This contention of Mr.Goklaney cannot be accepted as under the Excise Act, minimum sentence is prescribed. However, it has been held by the Full Bench of this Court in ‘Joginder Singh vs. the State of Punjab, 1980 Criminal Law Journal 1218’, that where minimum sentence is prescribed, there is no bar to release the accused on probation. In the present case, the petitioner has suffered protracted trial of 24 years. Long pendency of the criminal proceedings in itself is a consideration to grant benefit of probation to the petitioner. Furthermore, at the time of incident, petitioner was aged 24 years, as is evident from the head note of the Trial Court judgment. He is now aged about 50 years. During last 24 years, as per Mr.Goklaney, petitioner has not only married but has got children, who are of marriageable age. Sending the petitioner behind the bars at this stage will unnecessarily burden progeny with stigma. On the question asked by this Court, Mr.Goklaney has stated that during last 24 years, petitioner has suffered no conviction or sentence on account of the similar offence. Taking the totality of circumstances and also antecedents of the petitioner in last 24 years, he is ordered to be released on probation. However, sentence of fine of Rs.5000/- is increased to Rs.15,000/- and the same shall be converted as cost of litigation. Non deposit of cost by the petitioner shall be considered as dismissal of present revision petition. [Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia] Judge February 1, 2008. rps