Crl.R.No.1936 of 2002 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CASE NO.: Crl.R.No.1936 of 2002 DATE OF DECISION: March 24, 2009 BHARAT SINGH ...PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA. PRESENT: MR. JITENDER DHANDA, ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER. MR. GAGANDEEP SINGH WASU, DAG, HARYANA. ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(ORAL) The petitioner is aggrieved by the judgement dated 15.9.1999, passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hisar and the judgement dated 13.9.2002, passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Hisar vide which the petitioner has been convicted under Section 61(1)(c) of the Excise Act and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for a period of 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo imprisonment for 3 months. Mr. Dhanda, counsel for the petitioner at the outset has submitted that he does not wish to challenge the findings of both the Courts below. As far as the conviction is concerned, learned counsel, however, submits that the sentence awarded to the petitioner may be reduced to the one already undergone by him as the incident took place on 21.3.1991. Learned counsel submits that as the petitioner has already suffered the agony of a long and protracted trial and was a first offender, therefore, the Crl.R.No.1936 of 2002 -2- sentence be reduced as prayed for. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has also undergone more than 2 months of the sentence. The argument of the counsel for the petitioner is vehemently opposed by Mr. Wasu, counsel for the State. He submits that both the Courts below have upheld the conviction of the petitioner, hence, no reduction in the sentence is called for. After hearing the counsel for the parties, I am of the considered opinion that as the petitioner has suffered a long and protracted trial of more than 18 years and has undergone more than 2 months of actual sentence, hence the ends of justice would be adequately met if the sentence of the petitioner is reduced to the one already undergone by him. In view of the above, I upheld the conviction of the petitioner under Section 61(1)(c) of the Excise Act and, however, reduce the sentence of the petitioner to the one already undergone by him. As the petitioner is a labourer, therefore, the petitioner shall, however, pay a fine of Rs.5000/- over and above the fine already paid by him. The fine shall be deposited by the petitioner within a period of 3 months from today, failing which he shall serve out the remaining period of the sentence. Revision petition disposed of. March 24, 2009 (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) Gulati JUDGE