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.

Baldeo Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan

Baldeo Singh vs State of Rajasthan

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Nov 24, 1989
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/768173

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. Cr. Revision Petition No. 276 of 1989
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

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

Rajasthan Prohibition Act, 1969 - Section 4(2) and Probation of Offenders Act, 1958--Section 4--Benefit of probation--Offence committed on 4-8-1981--No previous conviction stands at the discredit of accused--Held, it would not be improper to extend benefit of probation;The offence was committed on 4-8-1981 and the R...

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Baldeo Singh

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Reported In
1989(2)WLN347

Excerpt

rajasthan prohibition act, 1969 - section 4(2) and probation of offenders act, 1958--section 4--benefit of probation--offence committed on 4-8-1981--no previous conviction stands at the discredit of accused--held, it would not be improper to extend benefit of probation;the offence was committed on 4-8-1981 and the rajasthan prohibition act, 1969 is now a dead law. no previous conviction stands at the discredit of the accused. in these circumstances, it would not be improper to extend the benefit of probation to the accused under section 4 of the probation of offenders act, 1958.;revision partly allowed. - - two thousand only) together with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned munsif & judicial magistrate, sri karanpur to appear and receive sentence when called upon during two years and in the meantime to keep the peace and be a good behaviour. the accused be released as well as the aforesaid bonds are furnished.shyam sunder byas, j.1. this revision was admitted on a limited question as to whether the benefit of the probation should be extended to the accused-petitioner under the probation of offenders act, 1938. the undisputed facts are that 50 bottles of illicit liquor was found in possession of the accused on 4-8-1981. he was convicted by the trial court under section 4(2) of the rajasthan prohibition act, 1969 and sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment. the accused went in appeal which was heard and decided by the additional sessions judge no. 1, sri ganganagar. he partly allowed the appeal, maintained the conviction but reduced the sentence from two years to six months. the accused has approached this court.2. it was argued by mr. garg for the offence was committed on 4-8-1981 and the rajasthan prohibition act, 1969 was repelled on 11-8-1981. he has relied upon several decisions of his court in which the benefit of probation was extended to the accused found guilty of offence under section 4(2) of the rajasthan prohibition act, 1969.3. the offence was committed on 4-8-1981 and the rajasthan prohibition act, 1969 is now a dead law. no previous conviction stands at the discredit of the accused. in these circumstances, it would not be improper to extend the benefit of probation to the accused under section 4 of the probation of offenders act, 1958.4. in the result, the revision is partly allowed. the conviction of accused baldeo singh alias baljeet singh under section 4(2) of the rajasthan prohibition act, 1969 is maintained but the sentences awarded to him thereunder are set aside. instead of sentencing him at once to any punishment, it is directed that be released on his entering into a bond in a sum of rs. 2,000/- (rs. two thousand only) together with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned munsif & judicial magistrate, sri karanpur to appear and receive sentence when called upon during two years and in the meantime to keep the peace.....

Full Judgment

Shyam Sunder Byas, J.

1. This revision was admitted on a limited question as to whether the benefit of the probation should be extended to the accused-petitioner under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1938. The undisputed facts are that 50 bottles of illicit liquor was found in possession of the accused on 4-8-1981. He was convicted by the trial court under Section 4(2) of the Rajasthan Prohibition Act, 1969 and sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment. The accused went in appeal which was heard and decided by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Sri Ganganagar. He partly allowed the appeal, maintained the conviction but reduced the sentence from two years to six months. The accused has approached this Court.

2. It was argued by Mr. Garg for the offence was committed on 4-8-1981 and the Rajasthan Prohibition Act, 1969 was repelled on 11-8-1981. He has relied upon several decisions of his Court in which the benefit of probation was extended to the accused found guilty of offence Under Section 4(2) of the Rajasthan Prohibition Act, 1969.

3. The offence was committed on 4-8-1981 and the Rajasthan Prohibition Act, 1969 is now a dead law. No previous conviction stands at the discredit of the accused. In these circumstances, it would not be improper to extend the benefit of probation to the accused Under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.

4. In the result, the revision is partly allowed. The conviction of accused Baldeo Singh alias Baljeet Singh Under Section 4(2) of the Rajasthan Prohibition Act, 1969 is maintained but the sentences awarded to him thereunder are set aside. Instead of sentencing him at once to any punishment, it is directed that be released on his entering into a bond in a sum of Rs. 2,000/- (Rs. two thousand only) together with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, Sri Karanpur to appear and receive sentence when called upon during two years and in the meantime to keep the peace and be a good behaviour. The accused be released as well as the aforesaid bonds are furnished.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial