Criminal Revision No.2078 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.2078 of 2007 Date of Decision: May 20, 2009 Prem Singh ...........Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Ms.Dimple Sanghwan,Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms.Maloo Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana ** Sabina, J. Petitioner was convicted for offence under Sections 279/337/304-A of the Indian Penal Code (`IPC' for short) vide judgment dated 5.5.2006 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Rewari. Vide order dated 6.5.2006, petitioner was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year under Section 304-A IPC; to undergo simple imprisonment for three months under Section 337 IPC and to undergo simple imprisonment for three months under Section 279 IPC. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari vide Criminal Revision No.2078 of 2007 2 judgment dated 18.9.2007. Hence, the present revision petition. The brief facts of the case, as noticed by the Appellate Court in para 2 of its judgment, are as under:- “Briefly stated the facts of the prosecution case are that on 04.06.1996, ASI Virender Singh along with Constable Prithvi Singh and Constable Sat Parkash was present at Maheshwari crossing in connection with patrolling duty. There complainant Laxman happened to see the police party who lodged the complaint Ex.PW4/A alleging therein that he is the resident of Dharuhera and is a labourer. Today, i.e. on 04.06.1996, he along with his cousin Babu Lal had boarded a jeep from Bhiwadi crossing which was packed with the passengers. He was sitting on the front left seat of the jeep. Babu Lal asked the driver to provide him a seat, but the driver asked him to stand on the foot- rest. Prem Singh alias Kala was driving jeep bearing registration No.DL-IC-D/6187 rashly and negligently. The passengers asked the driver to drive the jeep on a slow speed, but he did not pay any heed. When the jeep reached near Vikas Nagar crossing of Village Maheshwari, then a TATA came from the side of Dharuhera which was also being driven rashly and negligently. Both the vehicles crossed each other and in the process, Babu Lal was crushed in the iron angle. Babu Lal fell down on the road and succumbed to the injuries. Both the vehicles stopped at the site. The driver of the jeep as well as the driver of TATA Sumo are responsible for causing the death of Babu Lal, Both the drivers Criminal Revision No.2078 of 2007 3 were driving the vehicles rashly, negligently and on a high speed. On this complaint, a rukka was sent to the police station, where upon the formal FIR was registered against the accused. ASI Virender Singh, the investigating Officer reached at the place of occurrence, where he prepared the rough site plan with marginal notes, recorded the statements of the witnesses and prepared the inquest report. The body of the deceased was sent for post- mortem examination. Both the vehicles were taken into possession vide separate recovery memo and were got mechanically examined. The occupants of the jeep, who suffered the injuries were also got medicolegally examined. Both the accused were arrested. After completion of all the formalities, the accused were challaned by Sh.Amar Singh, Inspector, the then Station House Officer, police station Dharuhera vide his report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973”. Learned counsel for the petitioner, during the course of arguments, has not challenged the conviction of the petitioner under Sections 279,337, 304-A IPC but has submitted that the sentence qua imprisonment be reduced to already undergone by the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is not the previous convict and has a family to look after. Petitioner has undergone about three months of actual sentence. Accordingly, keeping in view the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is a fit case where the sentence qua imprisonment is liable to be reduced to already undergone by the petitioner. Hence, the conviction of the petitioner under Sections Criminal Revision No.2078 of 2007 4 279/337/304-A IPC is maintained and the sentence qua the imprisonment of the petitioner is reduced to already undergone by him. Petition stands disposed of. (Sabina) Judge May 20, 2009 arya