The court modified the sentence for possession of illicit liquor to the time already served, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial and considering the petitioner's hardships.

ORDER :

Farjand Ali, J.

By way of filing the instant Criminal Revision Petition challenge has been made to the judgment dated 08.02.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hanumangarh in Criminal Appeal No.15/2024, whereby the learned appellate court affirmed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.01.2024 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hanumangarh in Criminal Regular Case No.845/2013; whereby the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 19/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of 6 months alongwith a fine of Rs. 20,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo 1 month's simple imprisonment.

2. Bereft of elaborate details, facts relevant and essential for disposal of the instant criminal revision are that on 22.07.2013 A.S.I. Balwant Ram alongwith the police team seized 240 quarters of illicit liquor from the possession of the present petitioner. On the basis of the aforesaid recovery, FIR No.439/2013 for the offence under Section 19/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act was registered at the Police Station Hanumangarh Junction and after usual investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against the petitioner in the trial court, where charges were framed against the petitioner and trial was commenced. After full-fledged trial, the petitioner was convicted for the offence under Section 19/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act vide judgment dated 22.11.2013 and was given the benefit of probation. The matter was remanded by the learned appellate court upon appeal by the State, whereafter the petitioner was convicted and sentenced vide judgment dated 10.01.2024. The appeal preferred against the said judgment came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 08.02.2024. Hence, this revision petition.

3. After arguing the case on merits to some extent, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he will not assail conviction of the petitioner and confines his arguments to the alternative prayer of reduction of the sentence awarded by the trial court. He submits that the incident in the present case pertains to the year 2013 and involves the offence of keeping in possession illicit liquor. The petitioner was aged around 43 years at that time and at present he is 54 years old. He is a poor person. He has already suffered agony of protracted trial of more than 10 years. He has remained in custody for a period of around 22 days during trial and during pendency of appeal and at present he is in judicial custody. The trial court had earlier given the benefit of probation to the petitioner. With these submissions, learned counsel prays that by taking a lenient view, the sentence awarded to the petitioner may be reduced to the period already undergone.

4. Learned public prosecutor has, of course, been able to defend the case on merits but does not refute the fact that the petitioner has remain incarcerated for a significant period of time.

5. Since the revision petition against conviction is not pressed and after perusing the material, nothing is noticed which requires interference in the finding of guilt reached by learned trial court and affirmed by the appellate court, this court does not wish to interfere in the judgment of conviction. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is maintained.

6. As far as the question of quantum of sentence in concerned, it is worthwhile to note that the occurrence in this case pertains to the year 2013 and involves a petty offence under the Rajasthan Excise Act. It took around 10 years to culminate the trial and in decision of the appeal. The right to speedy and expeditious trial is one of the most valuable and cherished rights guaranteed under the Constitution. The petitioner has already suffered the agony of protracted trial, spanning over a period of more than 10 years and have been in the corridors of the court for this prolonged period. He was around 43 years of age at the time of the incident and now he has tur