CRR No.214 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR No.214 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 10.02.2011 Mohinder Singh ....Petitioners Versus The State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Mr. Baltej Singh Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Jaspreet Singh, AAG, Punjab. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ***** ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL) Petitioner was found guilty under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. The appeal preferred by the accused/revisionist was dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Moga/Appellate Court vide judgment dated 15.12.2010 and the order passed by the trial Court was upheld. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not want to press the present revision on merit and requests that since petitioner was found guilty under Section 304-A IPC and maximum period of sentence awarded is one year, hence the petitioner may be released on probation. Mr. Jaspreet Singh, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, states that petitioner/revisionist is the first time offender and no CRR No.214 of 2011 (O&M) -2- other criminal case is pending against him. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. The sword of damocles is not to hangover the head of the petitioner for all times to come. He has suffered mental agony due to registration of this criminal case against them. In the opinion of this Court, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in the company of hardcore criminals. Instead of keeping the accused/petitioner in the company of hardcore criminals, releasing him on probation with enhancement of fine to be paid to the LRs of the deceased as compensation under Section 357 Cr.P.C. seems to be best option to avoid tension and to maintain harmony between the parties. Accordingly, while maintaining the conviction of the petitioner, I direct that the accused/petitioner be released on probation on furnishing of probation bond one surety bond to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court for two years. Petitioner shall also furnish undertaking before the learned trial Court of the effect that petitioner shall maintain good behaviour and shall not indulge in the wrongful activities during the period of probation. Three persons are reported to have died in the accident, hence compensation/fine imposed upon the petitioner is enhanced to Rs.15,000/- over and above the fine already imposed by the Trial Court to be paid equally to the LRs of each deceased. The petitioner is directed to deposit the above said amount, within one month from today, with the Trial Court to be paid to the LRs of the deceased as compensation under Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is made clear that in case amount of compensation is not deposited, as directed above, or petitioner is found CRR No.214 of 2011 (O&M) -3- involved in criminal activities during the period of probation, this revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed and order of the trial Court shall become operative automatically. With above mentioned modification this revision petition stands disposed of. (Alok Singh) Judge February 10, 2011 R.S.