S.S.GREWAL, J. - (1.) PETITIONERS were convicted under Section 61(i)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914, and each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-. In default of payment of fine, the defaulting convict was ordered to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months, vide order of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Barnala dated 22.1.1992. Appeal filed against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Magistrate was dismissed vide order of Addl. Sessions Judge, Barnala dated November 6, 1993. Aggrieved by the orders of conviction and sentence passed by the courts below, the petitioners have filed the present revision petition in which notice was issued only qua quantum of sentence awarded to the petitioners by the courts below, as well as for consideration of question whether benefit of Probation of Offenders Act, can be granted to the petitioners or not.
(2.) IN brief facts relevant for the disposal of this petition are that on 2.3.1990 SI Balwant Singh along with other police officials was on patrol duty and as the police party which was going in a private Jeep reached near the Co-operative Bank, Tallewal, smoke was noticed emitting out of the house neighbouring the said bank. On suspicion SI Balwant Singh along with other police officials entered the cattle shed, where both the petitioners were found distilling illicit liquor by operating upon a working still. At that point of time Sukhdev Singh petitioner was changing the water of the cooler whereas Dial Singh petitioner was found stoking fire under the hearth. The working still was dismantled and cooled down and the drum containing 150 Kgs. of lahan which was being used as a boiler as well as its receiver were taken into possession. Six bottled of illicit liquor were also found near the place where the working still was operating. After completion of the investigation, petitioners were challenged, tried and convicted by the courts below as stated earlier. Learned counsel for the parties were heard. On behalf of the petitioners, it was mainly contended that the petitioners are not previous convict and that they have already undergone agony of trial and faced proceedings in the appeal for more than 3-1/2 years and they may be released on Probation of Good Conduct. Both the petitioners are over 30 years of age and quite mature. They very well knew about the consequences of their illegal act which is hazardous for the public health and it is not a fit case to grant probation to them. Minimum sentence has been awarded by the courts below to the petitioners. No further concession can be shown to them, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the age of the petitioners. This petition is accordingly dismissed.;