IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 1456 of 2009 Date of decision : July 31, 2009 Bhupinder Singh ....Petitioner versus State of Punjab ....Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. Amandeep Singh Manaise, Advocate for Mr. GS Sandhu, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG Punjab L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) Bhupinder Singh has filed this revision petition challenging his conviction and sentence recorded by the courts below. According to the prosecution version, the petitioner was employed as Munshi (Clerk) at Dhanaula Brick Kiln. The petitioner took away two trucks of bricks from the brick kiln on 15.5.1996 and 20.5.1996 along with Jaspal Singh driver, in connivance with Jiti Singh. The said bricks were lying at the house of Jiti Singh. The petitioner and Jaspal Singh also admitted that in addition to the aforesaid bricks, they had also sold more bricks to other persons for about Rs 30,000/-. On investigation, Jaspal Singh and Jiti Singh were found innocent, probably because Jiti Criminal Revision No. 1456 of 2009 -2- Singh had purchased bricks by paying the money and Jaspal Singh had transported bricks at the asking of the petitioner. Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehgarh Sahib vide judgment and order dated 11.2.2008 convicted the petitioner under section 408 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs 5000/- and in default thereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. Appeal preferred by the petitioner stands dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib vide judgment dated 23.4.2009. Feeling aggrieved, the instant revision petition has been filed. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. There is concurrent finding of guilt of the petitioner by both the courts below. The said finding is based on appreciation of evidence and is not shown to be perverse or illegal so as to warrant interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. Pal Singh PW1 was working as labourer and he has stated that at the instance of the petitioner he had loaded bricks in truck on different dates and the bricks were sold to different persons. Dr. Charanjit Singh is owner of the brick kiln and he has also supported the prosecution case. Ram Dass PW3 also working as labourer has made statement similar to that of Pal Singh PW1. Naib Singh PW4 working as driver has also supported the prosecution case. Jit Singh PW6 has also stated that he had purchased bricks from the petitioner and paid price thereof to the petitioner. However, the petitioner did not deposit the same with the brick kiln owner. Manjit Singh PW7 and Sukhwinder Singh PW8 Criminal Revision No. 1456 of 2009 -3- have also stated that they have purchased the bricks from the petitioner in the same manner. Jaspal Singh PW9, driver of the truck has also stated that he had transported the bricks to different purchasers at the instance of the petitioner. Some other witnesses have also been examined by the prosecution. Prosecution has led sufficient evidence to prove the guilt of the petitioner beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the conviction of the petitioner is affirmed. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the case was registered on 13.9.1996 i.e. almost 13 years ago and therefore, sentence of the petitioner warrants reduction. The prayer has been opposed by learned State counsel. I have carefully considered the matter. Keeping in view all the circumstances including the fact that the case was registered almost 13 years ago, sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner by the courts below is reduced from rigorous imprisonment of two years to rigorous imprisonment of one year while maintaining sentence of fine and sentence in default thereof. With reduction in the sentence as aforesaid, the revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. ( L.N. Mittal ) July 31, 2009 Judge 'dalbir'