IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.Revision No.121 of 2004. Date of decision: 27.09.2010. Yudhvir Singh … …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. … …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Dev Darshan Sud,J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No. For the Petitioner: Mr.H.K. Bhardwaj, Advocate. For Respondent No.1: Mr.P.K.Sharma, Additional Advocate General with Ms.Shubh Mahajan, Deputy Advocate General. Dev Darshan Sud,J. The petitioner is aggrieved by his conviction for offences under Sections 279, 337 and 338 IPC and was accordingly sentenced by the learned trial Court which findings were affirmed by the learned Sessions Judge on re-appreciation of the entire evidence. 2. Shri H.K. Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner, urges that the evidence on record does not disclose any fault on the part of the petitioner, the injuries caused are simple and the injured Ghogan was immediately rushed to the hospital by the petitioner himself and he also ensured that all medical treatments/aid was immediately rendered as also spent money etc. on his treatment. He submits that this is 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement? Yes. 2 not the natural behaviour of a person who is guilty of an offence, who would otherwise, have fled from the scene of occurrence. 3. I have gone through the facts and circumstances of the case and hold that normally the evidence is recorded after a long lapse of time of the occurrence and it is not normal that each and every detail can be stated by a witness with meticulous particularity. In these circumstances, I cannot accept this submission made by the learned counsel that the evidence is discrepant. 4. Looking into the other aspect of the quantum of sentence, learned counsel submits that it was the petitioner who had taken the injured to hospital and had ensured that proper medical aid was provided to her. This factor has not been considered by the learned trial Court while sentencing the petitioner. 5. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that the petitioner shall deposit Rs.25,000/- before the learned trial Court within four months form today. On receipt of the said amount the learned trial Court shall pay the same to the victim. In case, the amount is not deposited within the period allowed, the sentence will revive. This petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. September 27, 2010. (Dev Darshan Sud) (aks) Judge.