Crl.Revn. NO.195 of 2004 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Revn. NO.195 of 2004 DATE OF DECISION: 04.03.2010 Bijender @ Bijji ...PETITIONER VS. State of Haryana ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL PRESENT: Mr.S.K.Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms.Sushma Chopra, Additional Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent-State. MOHINDER PAL, J.(Oral) Petitioner Bijender was convicted by the trial Court under Sections 279/337/338/304A of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months under Section 279 of the Code. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months under Section 337 of the Code. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 338 of the Code. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 304A of the Code and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default whereof, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. His appeal was dismissed by the lower appellate Court. Hence this revision petition. At the time of arguments, comprehending that the case of Crl.Revn. NO.195 of 2004 2 the prosecution against the petitioner stood proved beyond all shadows of reasonable doubt, learned counsel for the petitioner did not challenge the conviction. However, he stated that keeping in view the facts that the occurrence relates to 27.11.1996; that the petitioner was sentenced on 05.01.2001 by the trial Court and his appeal was dismissed by the lower appellate Court on 07.01.2004; that he remained incarcerated for more than four months after his appeal was dismissed by the lower Appellate Court; and that Sword of Damocles had remained hanging over his head for more than thirteen years, lenient view may be taken in the matter of sentence. Consequently, conviction of the petitioner under Sections 279/337/338/304-A of the Code is maintained. However, keeping in view the facts stated above, I am of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served in sending the petitioner to jail again at this stage. Accordingly, the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner is reduced to the period already undergone by him and sentence of fine is enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. I order accordingly by modifying the sentence order. The petitioner will deposit the amount of fine in the trial Court within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Needless to say, if the petitioner fails to comply with the direction of depositing the amount of fine of Rs.10,000/- in the trial Court within the period stipulated above, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment as awarded by both the Courts below shall remain unaltered. With the above conditional modification in the sentence order, this petition is dismissed. March 04, 2010 ( MOHINDER PAL ) jt JUDGE