Crl. Revision No. 3186 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 3186 of 2009 Date of Decision: May 12, 2010 Megh Singh ........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ........Respondent ****** CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Aminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab. SABINA, J. The petitioner was convicted for an offence under Sections 420,467,468,471 of Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') by Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Malerkotla vide judgment dated 21.4.2008. Vide order of the even date, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2½ years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- under Section 467 IPC; undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 468 IPC; undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 420 IPC; undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 471 IPC. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred an appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur and the same was partly allowed vide judgment dated 16.9.2009 with the modification that the conviction of the appellant-accused under Sections 467/468/471 of IPC and Crl. Revision No. 3186 of 2009 2 the sentence awarded under the said sections were set aside. However, the conviction of appellant-accused under Section 420 IPC and the sentence awarded to him under the said section was upheld. Hence, the present revision petition. The prosecution story in brief as noticed by the trial Court in para 2 of the impugned judgment reads as under :- “ The present case was registered on the basis of a written application moved by Hazi Jaan Mohd. Son of Alia, grandson of Jeeva, resident of Androon Kelon Gate, Malerkotla, the contents of which are that “on 01.01.2001, Megh Singh son of Dalip Singh, resident of Mahdevi, Tehsil Malerkotla entered into an agreement to sell his land measuring 7 bighas at the rate of Rs. 42,000/- per bigha and he received a sum of Rs. One Lac from the complainant in the presence of witnesses and said Megh Singh agreed to execute and register the sale deed on or before 31.12.2001. The agreement was scribed by the Deed Writer on the basis of Jamabandi produced by said Megh Singh. Later, after verification, he came to know that Megh Singh forged the jamabandi in order to cheat with him. On the basis of said application, investigation was conducted and FIR of the present case was registered. Accused was arrested. The statements of the witnesses were recorded and after completion of the necessary formalities, challan was presented in the Court against the accused.” During the course of arguments learned counsel for the petitioner has not challenged the conviction of the petitioner under Section 420 IPC Crl. Revision No. 3186 of 2009 3 but has submitted that the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner be reduced to already undergone by him. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner is facing criminal proceedings since the year 2001 and he is the only bread earner of his family. Petitioner has undergone more than 8 months of actual sentence. As per custody certificate, placed on record, the petitioner has undergone 8 months and 3 days of actual sentence as on 21.4.2010 and he is not involved in any other criminal case. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be just and expedient to reduce the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner to already undergone by him. Accordingly, the conviction of the petitioner under Section 420 IPC is maintained. However, the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner is reduced to already undergone by him. Petitioner, who is in custody, be set at liberty forthwith subject to deposit of fine, if not already deposited. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. (SABINA) May 12, 2010 JUDGE Anand