IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.17 of 2005 Date of decision: 17th February, 2010 Prem Kumar … Petitioner Versus State of Haryana … Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: None for the petitioner. Ms. Hemlata Balhara, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana for the State. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present revision petition has been filed by Prem Kumar son of Shri Ram. He was tried in case FIR No.360 dated 31st October, 1996 registered at Police Station City Rewari under Section 61(1) of the Punjab Excise Act. On 31st October, 1996 at about 4.00 p.m. police party headed by HC Ram Bhagat found the petitioner in possession of 65 pouches of liquor. This amounted to contravention of provisions of Punjab Excise Act, 1914 therefore, the petitioner was prosecuted. Prosecution examined HC Ram Bhagat as PW-1, Constable Dharambir as PW-2, Constable Pirthi Singh as PW-3, HC Bijender as PW-4, Constable Kuldip as PW-5 and ASI Bhoop Singh as PW-6. Recovery memo Ex.PW1/A was proved along with site plan of the spot Ex.PW1/C. Report of Chemical Examiner Ex.P8 was also placed on record. Criminal Revision No.17 of 2005 The argument raised by the defence counsel that no independent witness has been examined was not accepted, as it was held that the testimony of police witnesses aspire confidence. The trial Court sentenced the petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for eight months and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month. The appeal preferred by the petitioner was also dismissed. The findings of two courts below cannot be disturbed, especially when no patent illegality or irregularity is discernible. In the present case, 65 pouches of liquor were recovered from the petitioner on 31st October, 1996. Petitioner has suffered mental pain and agony of protracted trial for more than 13 years. Ms. Hemlata Balhara, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana has placed on record affidavit of Satyabhan, acting Superintendent, District Jail, Rewari, in which it has been stated that petitioner has already undergone one month and twenty days of his actual sentence. The affidavit further states that no other case is pending against the petitioner. It has been held by a Full Bench of this Court in Joginder Singh v. State of Punjab 1980 Punjab Law Reporter 585, that even where minimum sentence is prescribed there is no bar on releasing the petitioner on probation. Taking totality of the circumstances into consideration, the petitioner is ordered to be released on probation for a period of six months to maintain good conduct and behaviour and bonds to this effect will be furnished before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rewari. However, cost of litigation is assessed at Rs.10,000/-, which shall be deposited by the petitioner in the Court. The trial Court shall call upon the 2 Criminal Revision No.17 of 2005 petitioner to furnish bonds and deposit cost of litigation. Non-deposit of cost by the petitioner shall be construed as dismissal of the present revision petition. With these observations, the present revision petition is disposed of. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE February 17, 2010 rps 3