Dinker Lal Mehta, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. I do not find force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The conviction is maintained.
2. Shri Mathur learned counsel for the petitioner has invited my attention to the judgment of this Court in Madania v. State of Rajasthan reported in RCC 131. This Court has extended the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act to Madania, who was convicted Under Section 54(d). This court released Madania accused looking to the fact that the occurrence has taken place seven years before the decision. This Court has also taken into consideration the old age of the petitioner.
3. In the instant case, it was submitted that the incident has taken place in the year 1976 & more than eight years have elapsed and the petitioner is facing the agony of trial since then. The petitioner is having a wife and three children. He is the bread-earner. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Mathur states at bar that no investigation, trial or inquiry is pending against the present petitioner.
4. It has come on record that the petitioner is not a previous offender.
5. Taking into consideration all the facts cumulatively, specially the statement of learned counsel for the petitioner made at bar that no investigation, trial or inquiry is pending against the present petitioner and he has not been convicted in any of the excise cases, I consider it proper that the sentence awarded to him should be set aside. I direct that the accused may be released if he executes personal bond in the sum of Rs. 2,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge, Kishangarhbas, and to maintain the peace and be of good behaviour, to undergo the sentence so awarded, provided he is not required in any other case.