Crl. Rev. No.1095 of 2002 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Revision No.1095 of 2002 Date of Decision: 22 - 3 - 2010 Bachittar Singh .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA *** Present: Mr.Malkeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Mehardeep Singh, DAG, Punjab for the respondent. *** KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Petitioner was named as an accused in a case FIR No.123 dated 2.6.1989 registered at Police Station Division No.5, Ludhiana under Section 381 IPC. The trial Court sentenced the petitioner to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- under Section 411 IPC. Aggrieved against the order dated 7.1.2000 passed by the trial Court, the petitioner filed an appeal. Before the lower Appellate Court, the petitioner had opted not to contest the conviction. In para 6 of the judgment, the lower Appellate Court observed as under:- “....Sh.S.S.Atwal, Advocate did not advance any arguments on Crl. Rev. No.1095 of 2002 [2] merits rather prayed that appellant has remained in judicial custody as an under trial for about 11 months 22 days i.e. 2.6.89 to 24.5.90 whereas he has been sentenced to undergo RI for one year. Simply for undergoing imprisonment for 7/8 days he will have to be sent to jail as such sentence be reduced accordingly. Addl. P.P. does not oppose the request much giver. I have carefully considered the said request and have perused the file. FIR against the accused was registered on 2.6.89 and he faced lengthy trial extending more than 10 years which ended with his conviction on 7.3.2000. Sending the accused/appellant to jail to undergo imprisonment for a week around would be just a formality and ends of justice would be adequately met if the accused/convict Bachittar Singh, appellant before this court is sentenced to imprisonment already undergone by him. Therefore, as far as conviction part is concerned, same is maintained but regarding sentence that part is modified. Accused/appellant is sentenced to imprisonment already undergone by him as under trial with such modification, the appeal is partly allowed. Appeal file be consigned to the record room. Lower court record be returned.” Since the sentence awarded by the trial Court was reduced to the period already undergone and the petitioner has not contested the conviction, this Court cannot doubt the findings recorded by the lower Appellate Court. It is too late in the day to say that the counsel had made the statement without taking the petitioner into confidence. No complaint was filed against the counsel in the Bar Council and no affidavit of the Crl. Rev. No.1095 of 2002 [3] counsel has been placed on the record. Such a bald assertion can be made at any stage. Therefore, no credence can be given to the statement made by the counsel that defence counsel before the lower Appellate Court had made the concessional statement without taking the petitioner into confidence. Hence, no interference is warranted and the present revision petition is dismissed. ( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA ) March 22, 2010. JUDGE RC