Criminal Revision No. 453 of 2003 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No. 453 of 2003 Date of Decision: 11.2.2010 Ranjeet Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. Pawan Dabla, Advocate for Mr. Vikram K. Chaudhari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Mehardeep Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) Ranjit Singh was named as accused in case FIR No. 266 dated 20.9.1997 registered at Police Station Patti, under Section 304-A IPC. The petitioner was convicted by the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patti, for offence under Section 304-A IPC and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. Aggrieved against his conviction and sentence, petitioner had filed an appeal. The same was dismissed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar. Sawinder Singh, complainant, along with his wife Rachpal Criminal Revision No. 453 of 2003 2 Kaur, his daughter Prabhjit Kaur and his two sons namely Hardeep Singh and Hardev Singh, was going to Patti. When they reached near the bridge minor in the area of village Thakarpura, he saw a bus coming from the opposite direction. He stopped his scooter on the left hand. This was done as the bridge was narrow. At that time, a Swaraj Mazda came from behind, and hit the scooter. Due to the impact of collusion, son of the complainant Hardev Singh fell down. The scooter was also crushed due to collusion and Hardev Singh died at the spot. His daughter Prabhjit Kaur became unconscious. The complainant read the number plate of vehicle as HR-02-A-3780. His daughter Prabhjit Kaur, was taken to Civil Hospital, Patti, where she was declared dead. The petitioner was the driver of Swaraj Mazda which had caused the accident. The two Courts below have placed implicit reliance upon the testimony of PW.1 Sawinder Singh and PW.3 Rachpal Kaur. Mr.Pawan Dabla, Advocate, appearing for Mr. Vikram K. Chaudhari, Advocate, counsel for the petitioner, has stated that since the two Courts below have come to conclusion that testimony of witnesses aspire confidence, he will not be in a position to assail the conviction. However, he will pray to the Court that taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has suffered a protracted trial, sentence awarded upon him be reduced. It is further submitted that occurrence in the present case had taken place in September 1997. The appellant has already suffered a protracted trial of more than 12 years. Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence before or after the present occurrence. Criminal Revision No. 453 of 2003 3 Though the protracted trial is a mitigating circumstance, this Court cannot ignore the fact that due to accident two minor children of the complainant had died. To draw a balance between the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, this Court is of the view that ends of justice will be fully met in case sentence awarded upon the petitioner is reduced to eight months rigorous imprisonment. However, sentence of fine is maintained. With the modifications in the sentence awarded upon the petitioner, present revision petition is disposed of. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge February 11, 2010 “DK”