Skip to content


Mahadia Vs. State of Rajasthan - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtRajasthan High Court
Decided On
Case NumberS.B. Criminal Revision No. 360 of 1978
Judge
Reported in1984WLN(UC)243
AppellantMahadia
RespondentState of Rajasthan
Excerpt:
.....a dead law. in these circumstances it would not be improper to extend the benefit of probation of good conduct to the accused.;revision partly allowed - section 2(k), 2(1), 7 & 40 & juvenile justice (care and protection of children) rules, 2007, rule 12 & 98 & juvenile justice act, 1986, section 2(h): [altamas kabir & cyriac joseph, jj] determination as to juvenile - appellant was found to have completed the age of 16 years and 13 days on the date of alleged occurrence - appellant was arrested on 30.11.1998 when the 1986 act was in force and under clause (h) of section 2 a juvenile was described to mean a child who had not attained the age of sixteen years or a girl who had not attained the age of eighteen years - it is with the enactment of the juvenile justice act, 2000, that in..........bottle of ill-cit liquor. the offence was commited in 1977. as such the benefit of probation of good conduct should be extended to the accused.. the accused was convicted under section 4(2) of the rajasthan prohibition act, which is now a dead law and is no more in force. in reply, the learned public prosecutor opposed she move.2. i have taken the respective submissions into consideration admittedly, only three bottles of liquor were found from the possession of the accused no previous conviction stands at his discredit. the rajasthan prohibition act, 1969 is no more alive and is now a dead law in these circumstances it would not be improper to extend the benefit of probation of good conduct to the accused.3. in the result, the revision is partly allowed. the conviction of accused.....
Judgment:

S.S. Byas, J.

1. The only submission made by the learned Counsel for the accused-petitioner is that the accused was found in possession of only three bottle of ill-cit liquor. The offence was commited in 1977. As such the benefit of probation of good conduct should be extended to the accused.. The accused was convicted under Section 4(2) of the Rajasthan Prohibition Act, which is now a dead law and is no more in force. In reply, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed she move.

2. I have taken the respective submissions into consideration Admittedly, only three bottles of liquor were found from the possession of the accused No previous conviction stands at his discredit. The Rajasthan Prohibition Act, 1969 is no more alive and is now a dead law in these circumstances it would not be improper to extend the benefit of probation of good conduct to the accused.

3. In the result, the revision is partly allowed. The conviction of accused Mahadra under Section 4(2) of the Rajasthan Prohibition Act, 1969 is maintained but the sentence awardtd to him is set-aside. Instead of sentencing him at-once to any imprisonment, it is hereby directed that he be released on his entering into a bond for a sum of Rs. 1000/- together with a surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Munsif a Judicial Magistrate, Churu to appear and receive sentence within a period of two years and in the meantime to keep peace and be of good behaviour. The accused is allowed one month's time to furnished the aforesaid bonds.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //