IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.2055 of 2003 Date of Decision 11.10.2010 Baljinder Singh ...... Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana ...... Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Naresh Kaushik, Advocate, for Mr.R.P.S.Ahluwalia, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.J.S.Rattu, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, for the respondent-State. ***** A.N.JINDAL, J: This revision petition has arisen out of the judgment dated 26.09.2003, passed by the Appellate Court, dismissing the appeal against the judgment dated 02.09.1999, passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala, convicting and sentencing the petitioner-accused (herein referred as 'the accused') to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs.250/- under Section 279 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- under Section 304-A IPC. In nutshell, the allegations are that on 24.04.1994 at around 11:00 a.m. when the complainant Jasbir Singh alongwith his father Gurdial Singh was standing nearby road and were talking with each other then the accused while driving the motorcycle bearing registration No.HYQ-4565 rashly and negligently, came from the Matehri side and struck against Gurdial Singh, as a result of which he fell on the road and succumbed to his injuries. Case against him was registered and investigated which resulted into charge report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. He was charged under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and opted to contest. The prosecution in order to substantiate the charges examined seven witnesses. Criminal Revision No.2055 of 2003 -2- When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against him and pleaded his false implication in the case. No evidence was led in defence. The trial ended in conviction. His appeal was also dismissed. Without arguing anything on merits, the petitioner has completely thrown himself to the mercy of the Court, stating that he has already compromised with the legal heirs of the deceased Gurdial Singh after paying a sum of Rs.3,25,000/- to them. He has small children and a marriageable daughter. He himself is also a handicapped person. Even otherwise, while peeping into the merits of the case, it transpires that both the Courts below have duly appreciated the evidence and there is nothing to mention if the evidence was not properly appreciated or there is manifest error apparent on the record, resulting into miscarriage of justice,warranting interference by this Court. As regards the quantum of sentence, the occurrence took place in the year 1994 and since then the accused has been facing agony of trial. Sword of sentence remained hanging over his head for the last sixteen years. He has settled the matter with the complainant and paid a sum of Rs.3,25,000/- to the legal heirs of the deceased on account of the accident. He has already undergone some part of the substantive sentence. Annexure P-2 further reveals that the petitioner is a handicapped person. Admittedly he is the first offender. Under these peculiar circumstances, it would be in the fitness of things to extend some leniency on the quantum of sentence. Resultantly, this petition is dismissed with the modification in the sentence which is reduced to already undergone without any alteration in the sentence of fine. Copy of the judgment be sent to Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala, for compliance. (A.N.Jindal) Judge 11.10.2010 mamta-II