Criminal Revision No. 508 of 2003 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 508 of 2003 Date of Decision: 27.1.2011. Gurmej Singh .... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH Present: Mr. D.S. Pheruman, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Raniv S. Chauhan, DAG Punjab, for the respondent-State. NAWAB SINGH.J (ORAL) This revision is directed against the judgment dated February 25th, 2003 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, whereby, he partly allowed the appeal filed against the judgment of conviction dated November 2nd, 1999 and order of sentence dated November 15th, 1999 of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Amritsar. The Additional Sessions Judge reduced the sentence of the petitioner as under:- Offence Sentence Fine In default 392 IPC RI for 2 years Rs.1000/- RI for 3 months 452 IPC RI for 2 years Rs.1000/- RI for 3 months 506 IPC RI for 1 year -- The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. In brief, story of the prosecution is that on May 19th, 1990 at about 7.30 p.m. Om Parkash (PW-1) complainant author of First Information Report was sitting at his shop in Amritsar. The petitioner along with Kuldeep Singh (proclaimed offender) and one other person came in a car. All of them alighted from the car. Kuldep Singh was armed with a pistol. They threatened Om Parkash and asked him to hand over the valuable items he had. Om Parkash Criminal Revision No. 508 of 2003 2 had to allow them to enter his house. They took away a trunk containing ornaments weighing 10 tolas of gold including a necklace of two and a half tolas, two golden bangles weighing five and a half tolas, one pair of ear rings weighing one and a half tolas, four rings and an amount of Rs.25,200/-. Om Parkash immediately reached the Police Station and made statement. On June 4th, 1990 the petitioner was arrested and was released on bail on November 5th, 1990. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that he does not challenge the conviction and prays for reduction of the sentence. He further stated that, (i) the petitioner has already undergone actual sentence of 7 months and two days as per jail custody certificate filed by the State; (ii) The main accused Kuldeep Singh, who was allegedly armed with a pistol, has not been arrested by the Police till today; (iii) The Police themselves did not ask for the Police remand of the petitioner as is evident from the order dated June 5th, 1990 passed by JMIC, Amritsar, whereby the petitioner was released on bail; (iv) No recovery was effected at the instance of the petitioner; (v) The petitioner has suffered the agony of protracted criminal proceedings spreading over a period of 20 years; (vi) He is not a previous convict nor has he indulged in any criminal activity before or after registration of this case and; (vii) He is the only bread earner of the family. 4. The aforesaid circumstances are of mitigating nature and justify the request made. Hence, this Court upholds the conviction of the petitioner but reduces the sentence to the period already undergone by him. 5. The revision is accepted partly as indicated above. 27.1.2011 (NAWAB SINGH) SN JUDGE