IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.2228 of 2008 Date of decision: 5th March, 2010 Gurpal Singh … Petitioner Versus State of Haryana … Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. S.S. Walia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ravish Kaushik, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana for the State. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. Gurpal Singh son of Kashmir Singh has filed the present revision petition. He was nominated as an accused in case FIR No.128 dated 11.09.1998 registered at Police Station Jakhal under Sections 279, 336, 337, 338 and 304-A IPC. The Court of Judicial Magistrate (1st Class), Tohana found the petitioner guilty of offence under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A IPC vide judgment dated 26th April, 2005 and on 27th April, 2005 sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- for offence under Section 279 IPC. The petitioner was also sentenced under Section 337 IPC to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs.100/-. He was further sentenced under Section 304-A IPC to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.100/-. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner was ordered to Criminal Revision No. 2228 of 2008 undergo simple imprisonment for a period of five days each. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved against the judgment of conviction and order or sentence, petitioner had filed an appeal. The lower appellate Court dismissed the appeal, upheld the conviction and maintained the sentence. On 11th September, 1998 at about 6.00 p.m., Banwari Lal an official of Police Station, Jakhal, along with his companion police officials, was on the patrol duty and was going on foot towards village Talwara from village Mayond Khurd. When they reached near the bridge of Ghaggar river, a jeep bearing registration No.HNU-585 came from Jakhal side. The jeep was being driven by a Sardar and 4/5 passengers were sitting in the same. The jeep came in a very rash and negligent manner and a side of the jeep struck the police party, due to which Raj Singh Constable No.766 received injuries on his left foot, head and waist, and he became unconscious. Head Constable Ram Niwas had a narrow escape, whereas Banwari Lal suffered some minor injuries. Constable Raj Singh was referred to PGI, Rohtak. The occurrence took place due to rash and negligent driving of the jeep driver. Subsequently, Constable Raj Singh died. Dr.C.S. Chhajed PW-2 had conducted autopsy on the dead body of Constable Raj Singh on 12th September, 1998. Head Constable Ram Niwas appeared as PW-1 and Banwari Lal appeared as PW-6. Both the courts below have placed implicit reliance upon the testimony of Head Constable Ram Niwas PW-1 and Banwari Lal PW-6. Counsel for the petitioner has not assailed the conviction of the petitioner. Banwari Lal PW-6 had proved the identity of driver of the jeep and stated that the petitioner was one, who was driving the offending jeep. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner has already 2 Criminal Revision No. 2228 of 2008 undergone three months and five days actual sentence out of the sentence awarded to him. This fact is noticed in the order dated 23rd January, 2009, whereby the present revision petition was admitted. Counsel has further submitted that occurrence in the present case had taken place in the year 1998. The petitioner has suffered mental pain and agony of a protracted trial and is in the corridors of the Court for the last about 12 years. Counsel has stated that the petitioner has not committed any other offence before or after registration of the case. Learned counsel has contended that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay compensation to the family of the deceased Constable Raj Singh. Considering the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that sending the petitioner behind the bars at this stage will not serve any useful purpose. However, in case some compensation is paid, the same will provide solace to the family of the deceased. Accordingly, the sentence awarded to the petitioner is reduced to the period already undergone. However, sentence of fine under Section 304-A IPC is enhanced to Rs.35,000/-. The same shall be deposited within three months after receipt of certified copy of this order. The amount of fine, so deposited, shall be disbursed as compensation to the family of the deceased, Constable Raj Singh. In case fine is not deposited, no benefit in reduction of sentence shall accrue to the petitioner. With the observations made above, present revision petition is disposed of. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE March 5, 2010 rps 3