IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 212 of 2003 Date of decision: February 08, 2010 Rupinder Kumar .. Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Sanjeev K. Bawa, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.B.S. Teji, AAG, Punjab for the respondent. A.N. Jindal, J The petitioner Rupinder Kumar (herein referred as 'the petitioner') was prosecuted for the offence under Sections 279/337 IPC read with Section 181 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for driving his scooter rashly and negligently without holding a valid driving licence and thereby causing injuries to the complainant. Ultimately, vide judgment dated 17.1.2002 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nabha, he was convicted for the aforesaid offences and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months under Section 279 IPC; rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay fine of Rs.200/- under Section 337 IPC; and simple imprisonment for one month and to pay fine of Rs.400/- under Section 181 of the Motor Vehicle Act. The appeal preferred by the petitioner was also dismissed vide judgment dated 30.11.2002 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala. Brief resume of facts is that on 29.7.1999, Gurdial Singh along with Kala was travelling on mule cart towards Nabha. After crossing the Railway Crossing, they reached near Kalyan Flour Mill, when they stopped the mule cart and parked the same. Gurdial Singh got down from the mule cart to meet his son in law Netar Singh. Thereafter, Gurdial Singh was going to sit on the cart, in the meanwhile, the petitioner while driving scooter bearing registration No.PB-11-3724 rashly and negligently struck against the cart, as a result of which he fell down on the road and sustained injuries. He was removed to Civil Hospital, Nabha. On the basis of the Crl. Revision No. 212 of 2003 -2- *** statement of the complainant, a case was registered, investigated and challan was presented in the court. The prosecution led evidence and ultimately, the trial ended in conviction. His appeal was also dismissed. Arguments heard. Record perused. Gurdial Singh (PW3) and Netar Singh (PW5) have consistently stated about the commission of the crime by the accused. Their testimonies stand supported by Dr. Paramvir Singh (PW4). No illegality has been shown warranting interference at this revisional stage. However, keeping in view that the occurrence took place way back on 29.7.1999 and the petitioner had already undergone about two months and three days out of the substantive sentence, therefore, some reduction in the sentence is warranted. Resultantly, while dismissing the revision petition, the sentence is modified and is reduced to that of already undergone without alteration in the sentence of fine. Copy of the judgment be sent to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala for compliance. February 08, 2010 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge