Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Mahadia Vs. State of Rajasthan

Mahadia vs State of Rajasthan

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided May 16, 1984
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/760556

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 360 of 1978
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Rajasthan Prohibition Act, 1969 - Section 4(2)--Sentence--Only 3 bottles of liquor recovered--Accused not previous convict--Prohibition Act now a dead law--Held, it would not be improper to extend benefit of probation.;Admittedly, only three bottles of liquor were found from the possession of the accused. He previou...

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mahadia

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Reported In
1984WLN(UC)243

Excerpt

.....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 section 2(k) a juvenile or child was defined to mean a child who had not completed eighteen years of a ge which was given prospective prospect - appellant was about sixteen years of age on the date of commission of the alleged offence and had not completed eighteen years of age when the juvenile justice act, 2000, came into force - juvenile act, of 2000 has been given retrospective effect by rule 12 of juvenile justice rule, 2007 - as such, accused has to be treated as juvenile under the said act. - the offence was commited in 1977. as such the benefit of probation of good conduct should be extended to the accused. 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. 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.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.

Full 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.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial