Criminal Revision No.1681 of 2008. -1- In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No.1681 of 2008. Date of decision:25.9.2008. Lakhwinder Singh. ...Petitioner. Versus State of Punjab. ...Respondent. ... Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. C. Puri. ... Present: Mr. Vinod Khunger, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K. S. Pannu, AAG Punjab. ... K. C. Puri, J. Judgment. Challenge, in this Criminal Revision, is to the judgment dated 15.7.2008, passed by Shri J,.S.Chohan, Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur vide which he dismissed the appeal filed against the judgment/order dated 30.3.2007 rendered by Shri Puneet Mohan Sharma, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ferozepur, Criminal Revision No.1681 of 2008. -2- convicting the petitioner and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 15 days under Section 279 IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month, under Section 338 IPC. Succinctly, the prosecution case is that on 19.3.2003, one ruqqa No.839 dated 19.3.2003, from the doctor pertaining to injured Buta Singh, complainant was received in Police Station City, Ferozepur from the Civil Hospital, whereupon ASI Ajaib Singh along with HC Davinder Singh, HC Sukhdev Singh and other members of the police party reached Civil Hospital for recording the statement of the injured and sought the opinion of the doctor regarding fitness of the injured to make a statement. Thereupon, the doctor declared the injured unfit to make a statement. Due to VVIP Duty, ASI Ajaib Singh proceeded to Amritsar and the SHO deputed ASI Harprit Singh for recording the statement of the injured who kept on visiting Civil Hospital for recording the statement of the injured but the complainant was not ready to get his statement recorded with the said ASI. On returning Criminal Revision No.1681 of 2008. -3- from VVIP duty, ASI Ajaib Singh again visited Civil Hospital and recorded the statement of injured Buta Singh. In his statement, Buta Singh alleged that he was doing the work of rickshaw pulling at Ferozepur and after doing the said work, he used to return to his village daily in the evening. On 19.3.2003, he was going from Multani Gate, Ferozepur on his rickshaw towards Border road and when he reached near old Sabzi Mandi, Ferozepur, a tractor make Eicher, driven by some one whose name he did not know came and struck against his rickshaw. The said tractor struck against his rickshaw due to negligent driving by the tractor driver and as a result he suffered injuries on his right leg. After receiving injuries, he was taken to Civil Hospital on the rickshaw of one Kukku of village Shukna. The said accident was witnessed by Resham Singh son of Mehtab Singh of his village. On the basis of said statement, formal FIR under Sections 279/337/427 IPC was registered against the accused. Investigation, in the case, was conducted by ASI Ajaib Singh and on completion of same, challan was presented in the trial Court. The accused was charge-sheeted accordingly to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Criminal Revision No.1681 of 2008. -4- In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined PW-1 Dr.Hardut Jyoti, Radiologist, PW-2 Dr.Mahesh Chander Markan, Medical Officer, PW-3 Buta Singh, injured/complainant, PW-4 Resham Singh, PW-5 ASI Ajaib Singh and PW-6 Amarjit Singh, Clerk, DTO Office, Ferozepur. When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C, the accused denied the incriminating evidence appearing against him in the evidence and pleaded innocence. The counsel for the petitioner clamours succour only in the matter of sentence and has not challenged the conviction of the petitioner. The conviction of the petitioner having not been challenged and it having been based on cogent, convincing and reliable evidence, the same is confirmed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that out of total sentence of six months, the petitioner has already undergone sentence of 2 months and 10 days. He further submits that the petitioner is facing the agony of this criminal prosecution since the year 2003. He, therefore, prays that the sentence of the petitioner may be reduced to the one already undergone by him. The petitioner is facing protracted litigation up to this Criminal Revision No.1681 of 2008. -5- Court since the year 2003 and has already undergone imprisonment for 2 months and 10 days. I feel that that in the facts of this case, the ends of justice will be met if the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone by the petitioner .Ordered accordingly. However, the amount of fine imposed under Section 338 IPC is enhanced to Rs.5,000/- which shall be paid to the injured as compensation under Section 357 Cr.P.C. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. This Criminal Revision is disposed of in the manner indicated above. A copy of this judgment be sent to the trial Court for strict compliance. September 25,2008. ( K. C. Puri ) Jaggi Judge