- (1.) THIS revision petition has been filed by Chimman accused who was convicted for the offence under section 16/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Kishangarhbas and whose appeal has been rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kishangarhbas.
(2.) IT is not necessary to mention the facts of this case, as the only point argued before me by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the accused petitioner should be given benefit of section 360 Cr. P. C. The petitioner was convicted by the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate under section 16/54, Rajasthan Excise Act and sentenced to one year's Rigorous Imprisonment and a fine of Rs, 200/ -. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner was ordered to undergo further one month's imprisonment. In appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge maintained the conviction and sentence of the accused petitioner. On behalf of the petitioner, it was argued that the petitioner is a man of 60 years of age, and this is his first offence. This is a case of possession of some quantity of wash which is used for manufacturing liquor. It was argued that this is not a case where the working still was found with the petitioner. Apart from this, the petitioner had already been in jail for 7 days. So, looking to all the circumstances, the petitioner be granted the benefit of section 360 Cr. P. C. He has cited the case Magh Singh vs. The State of Rajasthan (1) in support of his contention. In this case reliance has been placed on Bishnu Deo Shen vs. State of West Bengal (2) wherein their Lordships of the Supreme Court have observed as under: - "section 360 of the 1973 Code re-enacts, in substance, Section 568 of the 1838 Code and provided for the release on probation of good conduct or after admonition any person not under twenty one years of age who is convicted of an offence punishable with fine only or with imprisonment for a term of seven years or less, or any person under twenty one years of age or any woman who is convicted of an offence not punishable with death or imprisonment for life, if no previous offence is proved against the offender, and if it appears to the Court having regard to the age, character or antice-dents of the offender, and to the circumstances in which the offence was committed, that it is expedient that the offender should be released on probation of good conduct or after admonition. If the Court refrains from dealing with an offender under section 360 or under the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act, of any other Law for the treatment, training, or rehabilitation of youthful offenders, where the Court could have done so, Sec. 361, which is a new provision in the 1973 Code makes it mandatory for the Court to record in its judgment the 'special reasons' for not doing so. " The petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Sub-section (a) of Section 54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act and not under Sub-section (c ). Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner that it is a proper case where the benefit of Section 360 Cr. P. C. be given to the petitioner. The revision petition is, therefore, dismissed on merits. While maintaining the conviction of the accused-petitioner u/s. 16/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act, he is given the benefit of Sec. 360 Cr. P. C. and is ordered to be Seleased on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 4000/- and a surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kishan-garhbas (Alwar) to appear and receive sentence when called upon during one year, and in the meantime to keep the peace and be of good behaviour. . ;