In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Criminal Revision No. 2047 of 2003 Date of decision: September 10, 2010 Nafe Singh .. Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Harish Rathee, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Rattu, DAG, Haryana, for the respondent. A.N. Jindal, J Assailed in this petition is the judgment dated 25.9.2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (II), Bhiwani, dismissing the appeal filed by the accused-petitioner (herein referred as, 'the accused') against the judgment dated 5/6.5.1999 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Bhiwani. convicting and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay fine of Rs.100/- under Sections 279/337 IPC on both counts, rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay fine of Rs.200/- under Section 338 IPC. At the very outset, without assailing the judgment of conviction, learned counsel for the petitioner has sought this court to extend him benefit of probation on the ground that the petitioner is the first offender and has already undergone about one month of the substantive sentence and he is also ready to compensate the injured for the injuries suffered by them. Having examined the impugned judgment, the evidence appear to have been appreciated in the right perspective. Both the courts below have given concurrent findings regarding the guilt of the accused. No illegality much less irregularity or perversity has been detected or pointed out warranting interference by this court. As such, no exception could be made to the findings of conviction returned by the courts below, at this revisional stage. Criminal Revision No. 2047 of 2003 -2- *** Now coming to the quantum of sentence, this court deliberates not to extend benefit of probation to him in the given circumstances of the case but for the reasons that the occurrence took place way back in the year 1995; the petitioner has already suffered a lot due to the protracted proceedings pending against him since then; he has already undergone about one month of the substantive sentence and that he is sole bread winner of the family, it would be expedient in the interest of justice if some leniency is extended to him. Consequently, this petition is dismissed with the modification in the sentence to that of already undergone by him without alteration in the sentence of fine. However, the petitioner is further burdened to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the each injured, within four months from today, failing which this petition would be treated as dismissed in toto. Copy of the judgment be sent to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani for compliance. September 10, 2010 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge