CRR No. 424 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRR No. 424 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 06.09.2011 Ashok Kumar ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ....Respondent. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Rana, DAG, Haryana assisted by Mr. Jashandeep Sandhu, Advocate for the State. ... A.N. Jindal, J.(Oral) Custody certificate filed by the State counsel is taken on record. Assailed in this petition is the judgment dated 3.2.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal, dismissing the appeal filed by the accused-petitioner (herein referred as, 'the accused') against the judgment dated 15/17.4.2010 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Karnal, convicting and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.2000/- under Section 354 IPC . At the very outset, without assailing the judgment of conviction, it has been submitted by the learned counsel that the petitioner being the first offender and having already undergone twenty one days of CRR No. 424 of 2011 2 the substantive sentence, may be extended some leniency on the quantum of sentence. Having examined the impugned judgment, the evidence appears to have been appreciated in the right perspective. Both the courts below have returned concurrent findings of fact regarding the guilt of the accused. No illegality much less irregularity or perversity has been pointed out warranting interference by this court. As such, no exception could be made to the findings returned by the courts below. Now coming to the quantum of sentence, it may be observed that the allegations against the petitioner are that he caught hold the hand of the prosecutrix and took her inside with an intention to molest her. The occurrence took place way back in the year 2007; the petitioner has already suffered a lot due to the protracted proceedings pending against him since then; he has already undergone twenty one days of the substantive sentence; no bad antecedents have come on record so as to dub him as habitual offender; he appears to be a young man of 21 years of age. No substantive assault is stated to have been committed by him so as to invite such a rigorous imprisonment. As such, I am of the considered opinion that ends of justice would be met if some leniency is extended to him. Resultantly, while dismissing the petition, sentence passed against the petitioner is modified to the extent that he be released on probation under Section 4(1) of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 on his executing a bond in the sum of Rs.5,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for a period of one year within which period he shall continue to be of good behaviour and keep peace and in case of breach of conditions of the bond, he will be ready to serve sentence as CRR No. 424 of 2011 3 and when called for. Copy of the judgment be sent to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal for compliance. ( A.N. Jindal ) Judge 06.09.2011 sk.