Crl. Rev. No. 2317 of 2002 [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Crl. Rev. No. 2317 of 2002 Date of Decision: Dec. 14,2009 Hansa Singh ......................................... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab................................... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Ashutosh Mohunta Present: Mr. Lakhwinder S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajesh Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G. Punjab. ... ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J. (Oral) The accused Hansa Singh has filed this revision petition challenging the judgment dated 2.4.2002 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mansa, as well as the judgment dated 20.11.2002 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mansa, vide which the petitioner has been convicted under Section 61(1) (c) of the Punjab Excise Act and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. Crl. Rev. No. 2317 of 2002 [ 2 ] Briefly the case of the prosecution is that on 4.6.1998, Gurdev Singh, Head Constable, was present at Jhanda Kalan gate, Sardulgarh-Sirsa road when he received a secret information that the accused Hansa Singh was a habitual distiller of illicit liquor and was running a working still in his residential house and if a raid was conducted then illicit liquor, Lahan etc. could be recovered. On the basis of the aforementioned information, a Ruqa Ex.PD was sent to the Police Station, Sardulgarh, and on the basis of the same, formal FIR Ex.PD/1 was registered. Thereafter, Head Constable Gurdev Singh along with some other co-officials proceeded to conduct a raid at the house of the accused. Daljit Singh, Excise Inspector, alongwith his peon was joined in the police party and the raid was conducted in the house of the accused which was situated in the area of village Roorki. The accused was apprehended and at that time, he was distilling liquor by means of a working still. At the time of his arrest, the accused was feeding fire in the still. The still was dismantled and cooled down and thereafter 20 kgs. Of Lahan was recovered, a sample of which was taken and the same was sent for testing. As per test report (Ex.PB), the contents sent were of partly distilled Lahan. Other apparatus for use in the working of the still were also recovered. After completing the formalities, the accused was challaned under Section 61(1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act. Charge against the accused was framed to which he Crl. Rev. No. 2317 of 2002 [ 3 ] pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Before the trial Court, the prosecution examined the official witnesses who testified that the accused was distilling illicit liquor. The test report of the Test Analyst was also submitted. After going through the entire evidence, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the petitioner was indulging in distilling illicit liquor by means of a working still. The trail Court also came to the conclusion that the report of the Chemical Examiner Ex.PF that the liquor distilled by the accused was illicit. In view of the aforementioned findings, the trial Court convicted the accused 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.5,000/-. The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mansa, vide judgment dated 20.11.2002. Counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not challenge the findings of the Courts below as far as the guilt and the conviction of the petitioner is concerned. He, however, submits that as the illicit liquor was recovered from the petitioner on 4.6.1998 i.e. more than 11 years ago, therefore, a lenient view be taken while sentencing the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has suffered a long and protracted trial and, therefore, he be released on probation. Learned counsel has placed reliance on the decision in Mangal Singh v. State of Punjab 2006(2) RCR (Criminal) 651 where Crl. Rev. No. 2317 of 2002 [ 4 ] the accused had faced a long and protracted trial of 17 years and his sentence was reduced to the one already undergone by him. Similarly, the petitioner has also placed reliance on Wazir Singh and others v. State of Haryana 2006 (1) RCR (Criminal) 709 where the petitioner has been found guilty under Section 61(1) (c) of the Punjab Excise Act and his sentence was also reduced to the one already undergone by him. Reliance has also been placed on the decision in Pakhar Singh v. State of Punjab 2007 (1) RCR (Criminal) 396 and on Gurbax Singh v. State of Haryana 2006(2) RCR (Criminal) 645 where also the accused were found guilty under Section 61(1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act and their sentences were reduced to the one already undergone by them. The prayer of the petitioner has been vehemently opposed by the counsel for the State who submits that the petitioner was a habitual distiller of illicit liquor and a working still was found in the residential house of the petitoner and, hence, he does not deserve any leniency. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner in the present case has suffered a long and protracted trial of more than 11 years and taking into consideration the judgments of this Court, as referred to by the petitioner, I uphold the conviction of the petitioner under Section 61(1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act but reduce the sentence of the petitioner to the one already undergone by him. However, the petitioner shall pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- which shall be deposited by him before the trial Crl. Rev. No. 2317 of 2002 [ 5 ] Court within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. In case the fine is not deposited within the stipulated period mentioned above, the benefit of reduction in sentence shall not accrue to the petitioner and he shall be taken into custody forthwith to serve out the sentence as imposed by both the Courts below. Revision is disposed of. 14.12.2009 ( ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA ) Rupi JUDGE