IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Revision No.1870 of 2002 Date of decision : 16.2.2010 Jai Parkash … Petitioner Versus The State of Haryana …Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.G.P.Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Y.P.Malik, DAG, Haryana. Sabina J. Petitioner- Jai Parkash was convicted for an offence under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code (`IPC' for short) vide judgment dated 15.7.2000 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class Siwani. Vide order of even date, petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 15 days and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- under Section 279 IPC; further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- under Section 337 IPC and; further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 304-A IPC. All the sentences were ordered to be run concurrently. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhiwani vide judgment dated 20.8.2002. Hence, the present revision petition. The brief facts of the case, as noticed by the Appellate Court in paras 2 of its judgment, are as under:- “2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 23.5.1994, complainant named Chetan Ram along with his brother Babu Ram, who were working in the Aggarwal Dal Mill, Siwani, were going in a truck alongwith PW Dharama Ram to village Gorchhi. Accused was driving the truck in a rash and negligent manner. When their truck reached village Barwa, he was asked to drive the truck properly but he did not pay any heed. Thereafter, one Crl.Revision No.1870 of 2002 tractor came from the front side. Since accused was driving his truck in a rash and negligent manner, hence, he struck his truck with the tractor and thereafter struck with a kicker tree. By such impact of accident the kikkar tree fell down on head of the brother of complainant named Babu Ram and who ultimately succumbed to the injuries in the Government Hospital at Hisar, where he was taken up by complainant and PW Dharma Ram. It was also alleged that from hospital a medical rukka was sent to the police station and whereupon a formal FIR was registered and on completion of investigation, then challan was put up before the Court for his trial.” Learned counsel for the petitioner has not challenged the conviction of the petitioner under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A IPC but has submitted that the trolly in question was overloaded with wheat straw. The petitioner had to look after his handicapped father and was the only bread- earner in the family. He had to support his three sisters and there brothers. Keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, it is a fit case where sentence qua imprisonment is liable to be reduced to already undergone by the petitioner. Accordingly, conviction of the petitioner is maintained. However, sentence qua imprisonment under Sections 304A IPC is reduced to already undergone by the petitioner. So far as the other offences under Sections 279/337 IPC are concerned, the petitioner has already undergone the sentence qua them. Fine has already been paid. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. [ Sabina ] Judge 16.02.2010 sd 2