Crl. Revision No. 416 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 416 of 2011 Date of Decision: 21.03.2011 Sher Singh ...... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari Present: Mr.Shelly Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gazi Mohmmad, DAG, Punjab. **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Ajay Tewari, J. This revision has been filed against concurrent conviction of the petitioner under Section 61 of the Pun jab Excise Act. The allegations were that on receiving a secret information that contractors Subhash Chand, Vinod Kumar, RC Gupta and Tarsem have bought English liquor from Chandigarh on cheaper rates and are in the process of changing their labels to sell the same on higher rates in Punjab, a raid was conducted. In that raid though the main accused absconded yet the petitioner along with others was found changing the labels. A total number of 3480 bottles of Whisky of the make Bagpiper, Directors Special and Aristocrat were recovered. It was not disputed that the petitioner was one of Crl. Revision No. 416 of 2011 2 the servants of the above mentioned contractors. Strangely thereafter the main accused were let off by finding them to be innocent. It is hard to believe that a menial servant had purchased 3480 bottles of English liquor from Chandigarh and the fat cat owners had no knowledge thereof. It would have been one thing if the Courts below had come to a definite conclusion that it was the petitioner who was himself involved in the purchase and tampering of the said bottles along with others but this is not so. He has only been found guilty of tampering with the labels and has been convicted and sentenced to one year imprisonment as mentioned above. It is not disputed by learned DAG, on instructions from HC Bhupinder Singh, that the petitioner has now been in custody for the last two months. Keeping in mind the fact that the petitioner was not the main perpetrator of the crime and inasmuch as there is no finding that he had purchased liquor from Chandigarh, I deem it appropriate to grant him some relief. Thus, even while upholding his conviction, I reduce his sentence to that he has already undergone. Let the petitioner be released forthwith. Petition stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE March 21, 2011 sunita