Criminal Revision No.1554 of 2002 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Criminal Revision No.1554 of 2002 Date of decision: 8.5.2009 Jaila Singh ......Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: None for the petitioner. Ms.Maloo Chahal, DAG, Haryana. **** SABINA, J. The petitioner was convicted for an offence under Sections 279 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC”- for short) vide judgment dated 21.3.1998 by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Fatehabad. Vide order dated 23.3.1998 the petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 279 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and a fine of Rs.700/- under Section 304-A IPC. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an Criminal Revision No.1554 of 2002 2 appeal and the same was disposed of vide judgment dated 15.6.2002 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad. The conviction of the petitioner was maintained by the Appellate Court. However, the sentence of imprisonment was reduced from two years to 1 ½ year under Section 304-A IPC and the sentence under Section 279 IPC was upheld. Hence, the present revision petition. Today, no body has appeared on behalf of the petitioner. On the last date also no body had appeared on behalf of the petitioner. I have gone through the record with the able assistance of the learned State counsel. In the present case, accident in question had allegedly taken place at about 8/8.30 p.m. on 5.11.1991. Complainant Jhana Ram and Ram Chander were going to the shop of Ramji Bajigar for purchasing crackers. Makhan Ram, brother of the complainant, was going towards his house after purchasing the crackers. In the meantime, Jaila Singh came driving the tractor in question and struck against Makhan Ram from behind. As a result of this Makhan Ram suffered injuries and ultimately he succumbed to his injuries. Complainant, while appearing in the witness box as PW-1 and Ram Chander as PW-2 have duly proved the prosecution case. The testimony of the said witnesses could not be shaken during cross-examination. The said witnesses had no reason to falsely involve the petitioner in this case and shield the real culprit. Criminal Revision No.1554 of 2002 3 Dr.H.C.Dahiya -PW/4 had conducted the postmortem on the dead body of Makhan Ram on 6.11.1991. Both the Courts below, after appreciating the evidence on record, have rightly convicted and sentenced the petitioner under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC. However, Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case and the fact that the petitioner has already undergone more than one year of actual sentence, the sentence of imprisonment of the petitioner is liable to be reduced to already undergone by him Accordingly, conviction of the petitioner under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC is upheld. However, the sentence of imprisonment of the petitioner is reduced to as already undergone by him. With this modification, the present revision petition is disposed of. (SABINA) JUDGE May 08, 2009 anita