IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 203 CRR-596-2010 (O&M) Date of Decision:-13.05.2025 SANTOKH SINGH …..Pe..oner Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB ….Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. Ankit Bhincher, Advocate for the peoner. Ms. Prabha Bali, AAG, Punjab. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) On the basis of secret informaon, peoner was apprehended by the police along with co-accused. He was found to be feeding the fire under the working Sll. 80 Kgs plus 20 Kgs of lahan besides six bo-les of illicit liquor were found apart from various other instruments for preparing the illicit liquor. The trial Court convicted the peoner under Secon 61(1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 vide judgment dated 14.12.2007 and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of `5000/- with default sentence of 3 months rigorous imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine. The First Appellate Court maintained the convicon as well as sentence as per the order dated 03.02.2010. 2. Against the abovesaid convicon and sentence, this revision was filed. 3. On 22.09.2010, applicaon for suspension of sentence was dismissed as withdrawn. 4. Although the custody cerficate placed on record by State counsel would reveal the custody period of the peoner to be only 03 days, but the old custody cerficate dated 12.04.2010 lying on the file would reveal that peoner had already undergone custody period of 05 months and 02 days. PRIYANKA 2025.05.15 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-596-2010 5. Today learned counsel for the peoner stated at the outset that peoner does not press the peon against the judgment of convicon; and that peoner confines his prayer only against order of sentence. It is submi-ed that petoner would be sasfied, in case he is sentenced to imprisonment for the period already undergone by him. 6. Learned counsel points out that offence pertains to the year 2000; that peoner has already undergone total sentence of 05 months and 02 days and so, he deserves to be sentenced for the period already undergone by him. 7. Learned State counsel has not seriously objected to the aforesaid prayer. 8. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it will be in the interest of jusce, if the period of imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone by the peoner, instead of sending him behind bars in the company of hardened criminals. 9. Consequently, the present revision is partly accepted. By maintaining the impugned judgment against convicon, the order of sentence as passed by the trial Court is modified and the peoner is sentenced to imprisonment for the period already undergone by him. As far as fine is concerned, it will remain same. 11. However, it is made clear that amount of fine, if not paid earlier, shall be deposited before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned, within a period of four weeks from today, failing which the peoner will have to carry out the complete sentence as imposed by the trial Court. Disposed of. ( DEEPAK GUPTA ) JUDGE May 13, 2025 Pry Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes Whether Reportable No PRIYANKA 2025.05.15 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document