CRR No.2954 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR No.2954 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 09.05.2011 Om Parkash and others ....Petitioners Versus State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Mr. J.S. Hooda, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms. Preeti Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ***** ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL) Present revision petition is filed against the judgment dated 4.12.2008 passed by Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hathin, as well as the judgment dated 20.10.2010 passed by learned Appellate Court/Additional Sessions Judge, Palwal, whereby petitioners were found guilty and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months for commission of offence under Section 323 IPC. They were further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years for commission of offence under Section 325 IPC and further to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. They were further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a CRR No.2954 of 2010 (O&M) -2- period of three months for commission of offence under Section 506 IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that sentence awarded to petitioners No.2 and 3 has already been reduced to the period already undergone vide order dated 21.2.2011. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that he is not pressing this revision on merit and is not challenging the conviction of the accused under Sections 323/325/506 IPC. Learned counsel has argued that this Court may enhance the compensation/fine and may consider to reduce the sentence for the period already undergone. Ms. Preeti Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana, states that accused/revisionist No.1 is the first time offender and no other criminal case is pending against him. He further submits that the petitioner/accused has already undergone about five months 19 days. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. In the opinion of this Court, no useful purpose would be served by keeping accused/petitioner No.1 in the company of hardcore criminals; reducing the sentence for the period already undergone and enhancing the fine/compensation seems to be best option. Therefore, sentence is reduced for the period already undergone in the present case. However, fine/compensation imposed upon petitioner No.1 is enhanced to Rs.15,000/- over and above the fine already imposed by the Trial Court to be paid to the injured. Petitioner No.1 is directed to deposit the above said amount, within one month from today with the Trial Court on deposit of fine learned trial Court shall issue notice to the injured and CRR No.2954 of 2010 (O&M) -3- shall release the compensation in favour of the injured. It is made clear that in case enhanced amount is not deposited, as directed above, this revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed. With above mentioned modification in the matter of sentence, this revision petition stands disposed of. Let revisionist No.1 be released immediately if not wanted in another case. (Alok Singh) Judge May 09, 2011 R.S.