Criminal Revision No.936 of 1996 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No.936 of 1996 Date of Decision: 20.2.2008. Jagdish …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Sanjay Vashisth, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Dinesh Arora, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, for the State. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) Jagdish son of Puran was prosecuted in case FIR No. 85 dated 9.5.1990 registered at Police Station Bawani Khera under Section 354 IPC. It is stated that on 8.5.1990 at about 8.00/8.30 P.M., PW.1 Bimla Devi had gone to the fields to answer the call of nature. When she was passing through the street at a little distance from her house, Criminal Revision No.936 of 1996 2 accused took her into his arms and she was dragged towards bara. On the noise made by Bimla Devi, PW.1, her husband Subhash PW.3 AND Chhaju Ram PW.2 were attracted at the spot. The matter was reported to the police. Jamphar and salwar of the prosecutrix were torn in that scuffle. Bimla Devi PW.1, Chhaju Ram PW.2 and Subhash PW.3 have deposed in unanimous against the petitioner. Minor discrepancies and improvements have been examined by the Courts below and both the Courts below have placed reliance on the testimony of these witnesses. In the revisional Court, I will not be able to re-appreciate and re-evaluate the evidence of the witnesses. No woman will come forward to level such kind of allegations as honour of her family is also involved. Therefore, I find no merit to differ from the view taken by the two Courts below. The trial Court convicted the accused/petitioner and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs.400/-. In default of payment of fine he was further ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. Aggrieved against the said judgement, the petitioner filed an appeal, which was dismissed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Bhiwani. At this stage, Mr. Sanjay Vashisth, Advocate, has stated that in the present case occurrence pertains to 8.5.1990 and the petitioner has suffered a protracted trial of about 18 years. He has contended that protracted trial should be taken into consideration for reduction of sentence. I find merit in the submission of Mr. Vashisth. Hence, the sentence of petitioner is reduced to three months. However, fine is Criminal Revision No.936 of 1996 3 enhanced to Rs.5,000/-. With these observations, the present revision petition is disposed off. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge February 20, 2008 “DK”