In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Revision No. 146 of 2003 Date of decision: 17.04.2009 Kashmir Singh ... Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab ... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. B.S. Jaswal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Palwinder Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab. A.N. Jindal, J This revision petition has arisen out of the order dated 7.1.2003 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, dismissing the appeal of the accused-petitioner (herein referred as 'the petitioner') against the judgment dated 7.12.2000 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Dasuya, convicting and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 279 IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- under Section 304- A, IPC. Succinctly put, the facts leading to the occurrence are that on 9.10.1994, Gurmit Singh son of Bua Ditta resident of village Dewal, Police Station Hajipur, disclosed to the police that on the aforesaid date, he was proceeding on scooter bearing registration No.PB07-5709 for taking diesel and Mahenga Singh was driving the said scooter. On reaching near the petrol pump, they alighted from the scooter and when Mahenga Singh took a turn towards the passage leading to the petrol pump known as Surindera Petrol Pump, in the meanwhile, the petitioner while driving bus bearing registration No. PJG-4063 of Pathankot Roadways Depot, rashly and negligently came from the side of Dasua towards Mukerian on G.T. Road and struck against Mehnga Singh dragging him to the paddy crop field. After causing accident the petitioner along with conductor ran away from the spot. On the aforesaid statement of Gurmit Singh,FIR Ex.PC/2 was registered and investigated. Ultimately challan against him was presented in the Court. Crl. Revision No. 146 of 2003 -2- *** The prosecution led sufficient evidence in order to substantiate the charge and ultimately the trial ended in conviction. The appeal preferred by him also failed. However, the sentence was reduced to rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 304-A IPC. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has not assailed the judgment of conviction and has urged that the petitioner has already undergone two months and one day of the sentence, therefore, a lenient view could be taken. Even otherwise, on appraisal of the evidence led by the prosecution, it transpires that both the courts below have appreciated the evidence in right perspective. The finding of fact returned by both the courts below regarding rash and negligent act of the petitioner could not be disturbed on flimsy grounds. Having pondered over the second limb of the argument, it needs to be mentioned that the accident took place way back in the year 1994 and the petitioner is undergoing pangs and ordeals of prosecution since then. He has already undergone two months and one day of the substantive sentence and he is ready to pay compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased. In view of the discussions made above, this revision petition is dismissed with the modification in the sentence to that already undergone by him and he is directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.40,000/- to the legal heirs of the deceased within three months from today, failing which this petition shall be treated as dismissed. Copy of the judgment be sent to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hoshiarpur for compliance. April 17, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge