M.M.PUNCHHI, J. - (1.) THE petitioner a young man aged about 21122 years, was convicted under section 61 (1) (a) of the Punjab Excise Act by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rewari. The allegation against the petitioner was that he had in his possession 45 bottles of illicit liquor. The quantity being large attracted on him a sentence of one year's rigorous imprisonment and an order of payment of Rs. 1,000/ - as fine.
(2.) IN appeal before Shri V. K. Jain, II Additional Sessions Judges, Narnaul, the petitioner's counsel did not challenge the conviction prayed for a lenient view to be taken in view of the comparative youth of the petitioner. The learned Judge then reduced the sentence of the petitioner to one month's rigorous imprisonment and ordered him to pay a fine of Rs. 1,500/ -, in default six months rigorous imprisonment. Surprisingly, the learned Judge, instead of sending the petitioner to prison, chose to release him on bail enabling him to file the present the present petition in this Court. Herein now, it deserves pertinent mentioning that been conferred the power to grant bail, other conditions satisfying, under learned Judge unaccountably took such a step for which there was no warrant in law.
(3.) ON revision to this Court, the bail of the petitioner in The circumstances had to be extended, for Surinder Singh J. took the view that the sentence of the petitioner needed reconsideration and a report of the, Probation Officer concerned need be requisitioned. The said report has arrived. According to the Probation Officer, the petitioner was previously dealing in illicit liquor and he had contacts with the police. Now, statedly, the petitioner had left the business of illicit liquor and had started selling milk and thenceforth had disassociated himself from the police after the recovery of the present liquor (pages 5 and 6 of the report). All the same, the Probation Officer has recommended the release of the petitioner on probation with supervision under section 4 (3) of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. I have considered all the aspects of the case. If what the Probation Officer says is correct, then it tells on the propensities of the police towards the encouragement of crime. It equally emits a moral that young men have to refrain from developing and maintaining such connections. I wonder if the provisions of the Probation, of Offenders Act 1958, would be able thus to maintain a protective isolation for the petitioner. But, as it is recommended, I have chosen fit to release the petitioner on probation. Let him execute a bond in terms of section 4 (3) of the said Act in the sum of Rs. 5,000/ - with two sureties of the like amount before the trial Court within a period of one month from today. He shall bind himself to come and receive sentence, when called upon to do so by the Court, and in the meantime to keep the peace and be of good behaviour for a period of two years. The petitioner would also be bound by a supervision order under sub -section (3) of section 4 of the said Act and he would remain under the supervision of the District Probation Officer of the time for the aforesaid period. The petitioner shall also pay a sum of Rs. 1,500/ - as costs of the proceedings. This petition is accordingly partially allowed. Petition partly allowed.;