Crl. Revision No. 140 of 2006 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No.140 of 2006 Date of Decision: September 30, 2010 Raman Kumar ........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ........Respondent ****** CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab. SABINA, J. The petitioner was convicted for an offence under Section 409 of Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar vide judgment dated 14.12.2000. Vide order of the even date, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1500/- under Section 409 IPC. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar vide judgment dated 19.12.2005 Hence, the present revision petition. The prosecution story in brief as noticed by the trial Court in paras 2 & 3 of the impugned judgment reads as under :- “2. Facts of the case of prosecution are that on 1.6.1995, accused Raman Kumar, aforesaid, was posted as Clerk in the office of Deputy Commissioner, Amritsar. He withdrew an amount of Rs.4,78,116/- from the treasury for distributing the Crl. Revision No. 140 of 2006 2 same as pay to the staff of the said office and out of that amount, he made payment of salary to the staff to the extent of Rs.3,37,052/- and balance pay of Rs.1,41,114/- was yet to be paid by him to the staff which he kept in an iron “Sandukari”. As per the instructions of the Government, he was to place on salary balance amount in the pay chest box of the Malkhana. 3. On 5.6.1995 Kewal Kumar Kapoor, District Nazir of the office of Deputy Commissioner made a report to Shri S.S. Khara, G.A. to Deputy Commissioner, Amritsar that on said date when he came back to office at 9.00 AM, Ex-chowkidar Bhim Sen and Safai Sewak Sai Dass stated to him that he locks of his office were broken and lying on the table of his office. Sh. K.K. Kapoor, Nazir, went inside the room and found that the lock of the Sandukari and iron almirah was also broken and lying the table. He found that the salary of the staff for the month of May was missing. Sh. Om Parkash Mali, disclosed to Shri S.S. Khara, GA to Deputy Commissioner that on 4.6.1995 he saw accused Raman Kumar entering the office of Deputy Commissioner on 7.30 AM and thereafter leaving after 10 minutes. Shri S.S. Khara, GA to Deputy Commissioner along with Shri P.S. Shargil, District Grievance Officer, Amritsar, on part of Sh. Kewal Kumar Kapoor, Nazir, went to the place of theft and found his report as correct. Accused came to the office on 5.6.1995 and started weeping and crying despite the fact that he was not having full knowledge of the theft. After going through the entire facts, Shri S.S. Khara, GA to Deputy Commissioner Crl. Revision No. 140 of 2006 3 came to the conclusion that the amount of Rs.1,41,114/- was stolen/embezzled by accused Raman Kumar and therefore, he sent letter Ex. P1 dated 5.6.1995 to SHO of Police Station, Civil Lines, Amritsar on the basis of which formal FIR under Section 454/380/409 of the Indian Penal Code was recorded against the accused.” During the course of arguments learned counsel for the petitioner, after seeking instructions from the petitioner who is present in person, has not challenged the conviction of the petitioner under Section 409 IPC but has submitted that the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner be reduced to already undergone by him. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that fine as imposed by the trial Court has since been deposited by the petitioner. Petitioner has undergone 2 months and 11 days of actual sentence and has lost his job. Petitioner has an old mother and young children to look after. Petitioner is the only bread earner of the family and is facing criminal proceedings since the year 1995. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be just and expedient to reduce the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner to already undergone by him. Accordingly, the conviction of the petitioner under Section 409 IPC is maintained. However, the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner is reduced to already undergone by him. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. (SABINA) September 30, 2010 JUDGE Anand