IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.2306 of 2002 Date of Decision: May 26, 2009 Gurjant Singh ...........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ..........Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Mr.Sanjeev Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Amandeep Singh Rai, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab ** Sabina, J. Petitioner was convicted for an offence under Section 61(1) (c) of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 (`the Act' for short) vide judgment dated 20.9.2000 by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate Nabha. Vide order of even date, petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala vide judgment dated 18.11.2002. Hence, the present revision petition. The brief facts of the case, as noticed by the Appellate Court in para 2 of its judgment, are as under:- " Succinctly, the facts leading to the filing of present appeal are that initially, Gurjant Singh had been sent up to face trial under Criminal Revision No.2306 of 2002 -2- Section 61(1)(c) of Punjab Excise Act by Police Station Sadar Nabha. As per the version of the prosecution, on 22.3.1996, SI Satpal along with police companions, while on patrolling duty was present at Tugan road, Chintawala crossing, where he received secret information to the effect that while working on Still, Gurjant Singh, son of Joginder Singh is distilling illicit liquor, in the motor Kotha of his fields and if raid is conducted, he can be apprehended. On the basis of the said secret information, ruqa was sent to the police station, on the basis whereof, formal case was registered against the accused under Section 61(1)(c) of Punjab Excise Act. Thereafter, SI Satpal along with his police party, proceeded to the fields of Gurjant Singh, son of Joginder Singh and there raid was conducted in the motor Kotha of his fields, where the accused was apprehended, while work on a still. Still was cooled and dismantled and the incriminating articles were taken into possession vide separate recovery memo. Site plan of the place of recovery was also prepared. On completion of investigation, the accused was sent up to face trial under Section 61(1)(c) of Punjab Excise Act." Learned counsel for the petitioner, during the course of arguments, has not challenged the conviction of the petitioner under Section 61(1)(c) of the Act but has submitted that the sentence qua imprisonment may be reduced to already undergone by the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is not a previous convict and is facing the criminal proceedings since the year 1996. There was no recovery of illicit liquor from the petitioner. Criminal Revision No.2306 of 2002 -3- Accordingly, keeping in view the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is a fit case where the sentence qua imprisonment is liable to be reduced to already undergone by the petitioner. Hence, the conviction of the petitioner under Sections 61(1) (c) of the Act is maintained and the sentence qua the imprisonment of the petitioner is reduced to already undergone by him. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Sabina) Judge May 26, 2009 arya