Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Kesar Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:10192) on 25 February, 2026
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2026:RJ-JD:10192]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 301/2026
Kesar Singh S/o Naanji Harmor, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
Karanpuriya Police Station Sarda, District Udaipur
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dilip Choudhary
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shri Ram Choudhary, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
25/02/2026
1. The instant criminal revision petition under Section 397/401
of the CrPC has been preferred by the petitioner being aggrieved
of the judgment dated 30.01.2026 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Dungarpur in Criminal Appeal
No.10/2020, whereby the learned appellate court while affirming
the conviction of the petitioner for the offences under Sections
19/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act as recorded by the learned
Judicial Magistrate, Seemalvada, Dungarpur in Criminal Case
No.91/2010, sentenced him for 3 years’ simple imprisonment,
while maintaining the fine amount of Rs.20,000/- and default
sentence of 3 months; simple imprisonment.
2. Bereft of elaborate details, facts relevant and essential for
disposal of the instant criminal revision are that upon receiving a
secret information, Police personnel laid a blockade at Rajpur
(Uploaded on 26/02/2026 at 01:05:49 PM)
(Downloaded on 26/02/2026 at 08:31:32 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:10192] (2 of 5) [CRLR-301/2026]
Ghati. At about 01.35 AM, Police stopped a truck coming from
Dungarpur and questioned the accused about the goods kept in
the vehicle, the accused told Police about carrying foreign liquor.
Upon conducting search, 499 cartons of foreign liquour was found
for which the accused had no valid liecence or permit. On the
aforesaid report, FIR was registered and after usual investigation,
a charge-sheet was filed against the present petitioner for the
offences under Section 19/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act.
3. The Learned Magistrate framed charges against the
petitioner for the above offences and upon denial of guilt by him,
commenced the trial. During the course of trial, the prosecution in
order to prove the offences, examined as many as 18 witnesses
and exhibited various documents. The accused, upon being
confronted with the prosecution allegations, in his statement
under Section 313 CrPC, denied the allegations and claimed to be
innocent. No evidence was adduced from defence side. Then,
after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and upon meticulous
appreciation of the evidence, learned trial court convicted the
accused for offences under Section 19/54 of the Rajasthan Excise
Act vide judgment dated 30.01.2019. Aggrieved by the judgment
of conviction, he preferred an appeal, which was allowed by the
learned appellate court vide judgment dated 30.01.2026 while
affirming the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence.
Hence, this revision petition is filed before this court.
(Uploaded on 26/02/2026 at 01:05:49 PM)
(Downloaded on 26/02/2026 at 08:31:32 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:10192] (3 of 5) [CRLR-301/2026]
4. After arguing the case on merits to some extent, learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he will not assail
conviction of the petitioner and confines his arguments to the
alternative prayer of granting the benefit of probation to the
petitioner. He submits that the petitioner is a young man aged 32
years. He has no criminal antecedents and it was the first criminal
case registered against him. He is a poor person. This was one
off incident and there is every possibility that the petitioner shall
be reformed if he is given a chance. He has remained in custody
for some days during trial and at present he is serving the
sentence. With these submissions, learned counsel prays that by
taking a lenient view, the petitioner may be given the benefit of
probation.
5. Learned public prosecutor has, of course, been able to
defend the case on merits but does not refute the fact that the
petitioner has remained behind the bars for some time and that it
was the first criminal case registered against the petitioner.
6. Since the revision petition against conviction is not pressed
and after perusing the material, nothing is noticed which requires
interference in the finding of guilt reached by learned trial court
and affirmed by the appellate court, this court does not wish to
interfere in the judgment of conviction. Accordingly, the judgment
of conviction is maintained.
7. As far as the question of quantum of sentence in concerned,
it is worthwhile to note that :
(Uploaded on 26/02/2026 at 01:05:49 PM)
(Downloaded on 26/02/2026 at 08:31:32 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:10192] (4 of 5) [CRLR-301/2026](1) The petitioner is a young man aged 32 years;
(2) The case involves the offences under Section 19/54 of the
Rajasthan Excise Act.
(3) It was the first criminal case registered against the petitioner
and he has no criminal antecedents.
(4) There is no report regarding any untoward behaviour of the
petitioner during the period of custody and during the period of
bail.
8. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and
considering the aforementioned mitigating circumstances, this
court is of the considered opinion that a reformative approach
should be adopted in the present case. Thus, this court while
taking lenient view towards petitioner, thinks it fit that instead of
sentencing him at once to any punishment, he should be be
released under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.
9. Accordingly, the revision petition is allowed in part. The
judgment of conviction dated 30.01.2019 passed by the learned
Judicial Magistrate, Seemalvada, Dungarpur in Criminal Case
No.91/2010 as well as the judgment in appeal dated 30.01.2026
passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dungarpur in
Criminal Appeal No.10/2020 are affirmed. However, the order of
sentence stands modified in the manner that the petitioner is
ordered to be released from prison forthwith on probation under
Section 4 of the Probation of the Offenders Act upon his furnishing
a personal bond in the sum of 25,000/- with one surety in the like
(Uploaded on 26/02/2026 at 01:05:49 PM)
(Downloaded on 26/02/2026 at 08:31:32 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:10192] (5 of 5) [CRLR-301/2026]
amount, for a period of one year with an undertaking to appear
and receive sentence as and when called upon by the court, in
case of default of any term and condition of the probation bond
and to keep peace and be of good behaviour during such period of
two years from the date of his entering into such bond. The bonds
be furnished before the learned trial Court, i.e. Judicial Magistrate,
Seemalvada, Dungarpur. The amount of fine as imposed by the
trial Court shall be deposited by the petitioner within a period of
90 days from the date of this order. The petitioner is on bail. He
shall be released on probation forthwith, if not wanted in any
other case, upon satisfying the aforementioned requirements.
10. The application seeking suspension of sentence and all other
pending applications are disposed of.
11. Registrar (Judicial) shall intimate the concerned Jail
Authorities regarding release of the accused-petitioner.
(FARJAND ALI),J
14-Rashi/-
(Uploaded on 26/02/2026 at 01:05:49 PM)
(Downloaded on 26/02/2026 at 08:31:32 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
