IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.160 of 2011 Date of Decision: July 07, 2011 Devinder Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State (Chandigarh Administration) .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. S.K. Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Ashima Mor, Standing Counsel for Union Territory Chandigarh. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. The revision petition has been filed against order dated 6.9.2005 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh. Judgment of conviction has been challenged. 2. On going through the impugned judgment passed by the lower appellate court, I find that when the appeal was fixed for arguments, the petitioner (appellant before that court) made a statement that he does not challenge the conviction part of the judgment under appeal. Resultantly, conviction has been accepted Crl. Revision No.160 of 2011 [2] by the petitioner. On the statement of the petitioner, the appeal was heard only in regard to sentence. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner has been ordered to be released on probation. 3. In revision, the conviction is sought to be challenged which cannot be done for the reason that petitioner did not challenge the judgment of conviction dated 5.11.2004 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Chandigarh i.e. Trial Court. 4. No indulgence can be shown in revisional jurisdiction. 5. The petition is accordingly dismissed. (AJAI LAMBA) July 07, 2011 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?