Conviction under the Abkari Act upheld, but sentence reduced after long delay and absence of criminal antecedents.

Evidence and trial statements were found sufficient to sustain conviction under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act, so the finding of guilt was affirmed. However, the Court also considered the long lapse of about 23 years since the occurrence and the absence of criminal antecedents, and treated those factors as relevant to sentence mitigation. The conviction was maintained, but the sentence was reduced to simple imprisonment for one year, with the fine already imposed retained and the default sentence modified accordingly.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act called for interference and whether the sentence required modification in view of the long lapse of time and the absence of criminal antecedents.

Analysis: The evidence and the statements recorded in the trial were found sufficient to sustain the finding of guilt under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act. At the same time, the Court took note of the long passage of about 23 years from the date of occurrence and the absence of criminal antecedents. In these circumstances, while affirming the conviction, the sentence was considered capable of being reduced to meet the ends of justice.

Conclusion: The conviction under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act was maintained, but the sentence was reduced to simple imprisonment for one year with the fine already imposed and the default sentence modified accordingly.

---