IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 3219 of 2009 Date of Decision : January 25, 2010 Dharambir ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Mr. Jai Vir Yadav, Advocate Ms. Shalini Attri, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana T.P.S. MANN, J. (Oral) The trial Court convicted the petitioner for offences under Sections 304-A, 279 and 337 IPC. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- on the first count, and, rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- on each of the other two counts. In default of payment of fine, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The petitioner filed the appeal against his conviction and sentence but the same was dismissed by the lower Appellate Court, except for modifying the sentence of imprisonment awarded under Section 304-A IPC from rigorous imprisonment for two years to rigorous imprisonment for one year. The present revision filed by the petitioner was admitted only on the quantum of sentence. Criminal Revision No.3219 of 2009 -2- Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is a poor person and sole bread earner for his family consisting of wife, children and old parents. The petitioner has been facing the agony of criminal prosecution since February, 1998. After the dismissal of his appeal on 9.11.2009, the petitioner was taken into custody and ever since then he is in jail. He has, thus, undergone a substantive sentence of two and a half months. It is also submitted that the legal heirs of Dalip Singh moved the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for grant of compensation and their petition was accepted by awarding them an amount of Rs.2,40,000/- as compensation. The said amount of compensation already stands paid by the Insurance Company to legal heirs of deceased-Dalip Singh. Prayer has, accordingly, been made for reduction of sentence of imprisonment of the petitioner to that already undergone by him. On the other hand, learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner, has submitted that on account of rash and negligent driving of Tata-407 by the petitioner, the accident in question took place, as a result of which Dalip Singh died and a few other persons received injuries. Therefore, the petitioner does not deserve any leniency in the matter of sentence. The accident in question had taken place on 10.2.1998. The trial of the case was over on 26.7.2006. It was followed by the petitioner filing an appeal which also remained pending upto 9.11.2009. The petitioner has been facing the agony of criminal prosecution all this while. He has also served a substantive sentence of two and a half months, out of the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of one year Criminal Revision No.3219 of 2009 -3- imposed upon him. The petitioner is stated to be a poor person and his wife, children and old parents dependent upon him. When the petitioner was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. by the trial Court, he stated that he was 36 years of age. There is also no material on the record from which it could even be inferred that the petitioner is a previous convict. The legal heirs of deceased-Dalip Singh have already been compensated as an amount of Rs.2,40,000/- awarded to them by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal stands paid to them by the Insurance Company with which Tata-407 driven by the petitioner stood insured. Under these circumstances, ends of justice would be amply met by reducing the sentences of the petitioner to that already undergone by him. At the same time, the total fine of Rs.2,000/- imposed upon the petitioner can be enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. Accordingly, the sentences of imprisonment imposed upon the petitioner are reduced to that already undergone by him. The total fine of Rs.2,000/- imposed upon the petitioner is enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. The amount of fine be deposited by the petitioner with the learned trial Court within two weeks from today. On the petitioner doing so, the trial Court shall issue necessary warrants to the jail authorities to release the petitioner from the custody. But for the modification in the quantum of sentences and fine, the revision is dismissed. Order dasti on payment. ( T.P.S. MANN ) January 25, 2010 JUDGE satish