CRR No.1710 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRR No.1710 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision:- 22.09.2011 Ram Pal ....Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL Present:- Mr. K.S. Sidhu, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Rajeev Godara, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. A.G., Punjab. ***** A.N. JINDAL, J (ORAL) Custody certificate, produced by Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. A.G., Punjab, is taken on record. Assailed in this petition is the judgment dated 22.07.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, dismissing the appeal preferred by the accused-petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner') against the judgment of conviction dated 28.01.2008 passed under Sections 323, 324 IPC, by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patiala. However, the first Appellate Court had reduced the sentence of the petitioner from six months to three months under Section 323 IPC. Conviction not assailed, however, the only prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that some CRR No.1710 of 2011 (O&M) 2 leniency may be shown on the quantum of sentence and he may be released on probation. In view of the fact that the petitioner has already undergone 01 month and 29 days out of the substantive sentence; he has been facing trial since 2003; he is working as Lab Technician in Rajindra Hospital, Patiala and he has a big family to support, therefore, it would be in the fitness of things if the petitioner is extended the benefit of probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. Consequently, this petition is dismissed with modification in the sentence to the extent that the petitioner is directed to be released on probation on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.5000/- with one surety in the like amount before the trial Court, to keep peace and be of good behaviour for one year and in case of breach of conditions of the bond, he will be ready to serve sentence as and when called for. The petitioner is further directed to pay compensation to the injured-complainant to the tune of Rs.20,000/-, within two months from today, which the complainant would be at liberty to receive against proper identification. However, it is made clear that the order of probation would not affect his service career. (A.N.JINDAL) September 22, 2011 JUDGE ajp