Criminal Revision No. 786 of 2002 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No. 786 of 2002 Date of Decision: 7.4.2010 Om Parkash …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. C.B. Goel, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Manish Deswal, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, for the respondent. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) The present revision petition has been filed by Om Parkash son of Sahab Singh, who was named as an accused in case FIR No. 23 dated 3.1.1993, registered at Police Station City, Panipat, under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC. The Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Panipat, vide its judgment dated 14.11.2000, held the petitioner guilty for the offence under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC. Vide separate order dated 15.11.2002, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, for the offence under Section 279 IPC. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 15 days. He was Criminal Revision No. 786 of 2002 2 further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, for the offence under Section 304-A IPC. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 15 days. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved against his conviction and sentence, the petitioner has preferred an appeal. The Appellate Court, vide its judgment dated 4.4.2002, had dismissed the appeal by upholding the conviction and maintaining the sentence. The accident, in the present case, had taken place on 3.1.1993 at about 8.15 P.M. Ram Mehar, Constable, was going on G.T. Road in his left side and when he was at a distance of two/three yards from the eye witnesses, then a four wheeler, bearing registration No. HP-05-1495, came from Lalbati Chowk, which was driven by the accused/petitioner. It is stated that due to his rash and negligent driving, the petitioner had caused the death of Ram Mehar, Constable. Both the Courts below have relied upon the testimony of PW.1 Rajbir, Constable, and held the petitioner guilty of the offences. Mr. C.B. Goel, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner, has stated that the petitioner has not committed any offence before or after the present occurrence. At the time of recording of his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. on 22.9.2000, the petitioner was aged about 32 years. He is a sole bread earner of his family. Learned counsel further canvassed that in case the petitioner is sent behind the bars, at this stage, no useful purpose will be served but his family will come to the vagaries. He is ready to compensate the family of deceased Ram Criminal Revision No. 786 of 2002 3 Mehar, Constable, in monetary terms, which may provide some solace. Learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner has already undergone one month and seven days out of one year's sentence awarded to him. Accordingly, sentence awarded to the petitioner is reduced to already undergone, however, sentence of fine is enhanced to Rs.35,000/-. The petitioner shall deposit the enhanced amount of fine in the trial Court, within three months, from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The amount, so deposited, shall be disbursed to the legal heirs of the deceased. In case the amount of fine is not deposited, no benefit in reduction of sentence shall accrue to the petitioner. With the observations made above, the petition is disposed of. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge April 7, 2010 “DK”