IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Crl. Rev. No. 92 of 2004 Date of Decision: May 4,2009 Sat Parkash @ Parkash .................................................Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .............................................................. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Mohunta Present: Mr. S.S. Dinarpur, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. G.S.Wasu, DAG, Haryana. ... ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J. (Oral) The petitioner was tried by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurgaon, for offences under Section 279, 304-A and 337 IPC and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.300/- for offence under Section 279 IPC, further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- under Section 304-A IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- under Section 337 IPC. Against his conviction and sentence, the petitioner filed an appeal which has been dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, vide judgment dated 6.12.2003 whereby the conviction and sentence of the petitioner has been upheld. [ 2 ] Crl. Rev. No. 92 of 2004 Mr. S.S.Dinarpur, counsel for the petitioner, has at the outset stated that he does not wish to challenge the conviction of the petitioner under Sections 279, 304-A and 337 IPC, however, a lenient view be taken while sentencing the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has already faced a long and protracted trial of almost 11 years as the accident took place on 1.8.1998. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner had undergone one month and 7 days of imprisonment and that there is no previous conviction against him. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is the only bread-winner of his family and that during the pendency of the criminal proceedings against him, his wife has also expired. Counsel for the State, however, submits that the petitioner is not entitled to be shown any leniency as because of his rash and negligent driving Rajpal, who was a pillion rider on a scooter, has died in the accident. After hearing the counsel for the parties at length and on considering the facts and circumstances of this particular case and also taking into account the protracted trial, antecedents of the accused and the fact that he had undergone one month and 7 days of imprisonment, I uphold the conviction of the petitioner under Sections 279, 304-A and 337 IPC but reduce the sentence of the petitioner to the one already undergone by him. The reduction in sentence is subject to the condition that the petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs.70,000/- (Rupees seventy thousand only) to the legal heirs of the deceased Rajpal. The petitioner shall deposit the amount of Rs.70,000/- in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon, on or before 31.8.2009 and on its deposit the Chief Judicial [ 3 ] Crl. Rev. No. 92 of 2004 Magistrate, Gurgaon, shall disburse the amount of compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased Rajpal. In case the amount of Rs.70,000/- as directed by this Court is not deposited by the petitioner on or before 31.8.2009 than the petitioner shall be taken into custody forthwith and shall serve out the remaining portion of his sentence as awarded by both the Courts below. Revision petition is disposed of. 4.5.2009 ( ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA ) Rupi JUDGE