IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.1977 of 2003 Date of Decision 09.09.2010 Hasan Mohammad ...... Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana ...... Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Satish Chaudhary, Advocate,for the petitioner. Mr.J.S.Rattu, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, for the respondent-State. ***** A.N.JINDAL, J: This petition has arisen out of the judgment dated 15.09.2003, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, dismissing the appeal of the petitioner-accused (herein referred as 'the petitioner') against the judgment dated 29/30.01.2003, passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ferozepur Jhirka, convicting and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and fine of Rs.200/- under Section 323 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.400/- under Section 325 IPC. However, in appeal, the sentence awarded under Section 325 IPC was reduced to six months. Allegations against the petitioner are that he gave shovel blow to the complainant Wahid on his back and lathi blow on the left hand of his father Sabbir. He also caused other injuries. Since the injury on the left ulna of Sabbir was found to be grievous, therefore, the case was registered, investigated and eventually, challan was presented against him. He was charged, tried, convicted and sentenced accordingly. His appeal also failed. Without assailing the judgment of conviction, prayer for extending some leniency on the quantum of sentence has been made. Even otherwise, on scrutiny of the impugned judgment, the evidence, as examined by the prosecution, appears to have been appreciated in the right perspective. No such illegality much less irregularity or perversity was found which may render the judgment as illegal, therefore, the findings of fact returned by the Courts below regarding conviction do not call for any interference at this revisional stage. Now coming to the quantum of sentence, it is noticed that the occurrence took place way back in the year 1997. The petitioner has Criminal Revision No.1977 of 2003 -2- already suffered a lot of agony due to protracted proceedings which remained pending in the different Courts. Custody certificate, produced by learned State counsel, reveals that the petitioner has already undergone 16 days of the substantive sentence. Under these peculiar circumstances, it would be in the fitness of things to extend some leniency on the quantum of sentence. Resultantly, this petition is dismissed with the modification in the sentence to the extent that the petitioner be released on probation under Section 4 (1) of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 on his executing a bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hoshiarpur, for a period of one year within which period he shall continue to be of good behaviour and keep peace and in case of breach of conditions of the bond, he will be ready to serve sentence as and when called for. However, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.20,000/-, (Rs.10,000/- each) as compensation to the complainant Wahid and his father, within three months from today, failing which, this petition shall be treated as dismissed in toto. Copy of the order be sent to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon, for compliance. (A.N.Jindal) Judge 09.09.2010 mamta-II