Crl. Revision No. 2091of 2009(O&M) -1- In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Revision No. 2091of 2009(O&M) Date of Decision:February 02, 2010 Rakesh ---Petitioner versus State of Haryana ---Respondent Coram: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH *** Present: Mr.Surfraj Hussain, Advocate, for Mr. Amardeep Hooda, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Yashpal Malik, DAG, Haryana GURDEV SINGH, J. Heard. This revision petition by Rakesh, petitioner, has been preferred against judgment dated 11.7.2009 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Sonepat, vide which he dismissed the appeal of the accused filed against the judgment dated 12.12.2007, passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonepat, vide which he was convicted for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC and was sentenced as under:- “(i)To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and fine of Rs. 3000/-, for committing the offence Crl. Revision No. 2091of 2009(O&M) -2- punishable under Section 467 of the IPC and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. (ii)To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and fine of Rs. 2000/-, for committing the offence punishable under Section 468 of the IPC and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. (iii)To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and fine of Rs. 1000/-, for committing the offence punishable under Section 471 of the IPC and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one and a half month. Notice of the revision was issued only regarding the quantum of sentence. I have heard learned counsel for both the sides. It has been submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the charge against the petitioner was that he had withdrawn a sum of Rs. 3500/- from the account of Ram Kishan by forging his signatures on the cheque. For such a meager amount, he should not have been sentenced so heavily; more so, when the said amount had already been deposited by the petitioner/accused with the bank. He has prayed for the reduction of the sentence. According to him, the petitioner is coming in custody since 11.7.2009, when his appeal was dismissed. Keeping in view the charges, which were proved against the petitioner, I am of the considered view that lesser sentence should have been Crl. Revision No. 2091of 2009(O&M) -3- imposed. While maintaining the sentence of fine, the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon the petitioner is reduced to as under:- (i)Rigorous imprisonment for a period of one and a half year under Section 467 IPC (ii)Rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 468 IPC (iii)Rigorous imprisonment for a period of nine months under Section 471 IPC (iv)Rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 420 IPC All the sentences should run concurrently. Revision petition is disposed of accordingly. (GURDEV SINGH) JUDGE February 02, 2010 PARAMJIT