IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.1549 of 2004 Date of decision: 17th February, 2010 Ashok Kumar … Petitioner Versus State of Haryana … Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Y.P. Singla, Advocate for Mr. Som Nath Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Hemlata Balhara, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana for the State. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Ashok Kumar was named as accused in case FIR No.85 dated 12.08.1999 registered at Police Station Sadar Jagadhri under Sections 279/337/338 IPC. It is alleged that on 12th August, 1999 at about 7.30 a.m., petitioner was driver of a Mahindra Jeep bearing registration No.HR01F- 6206. The jeep was driven by the petitioner in rash and negligent manner, therefore he caused simple hurt to Kiran Bharti and grievous hurt to Rakesh Kumar. On the day of occurrence, Rakesh Kumar along with his sister-in-law Kiran Bharti, on Hero Honda motorcycle bearing registration No.HR02C-8485, was going to village Bilaspur from HUDA Colony, Yamunanagar. Kiran Bharti was pillion rider. When they reached near the culvert of village Mahmoodpur, jeep of the petitioner collided with the Criminal Revision No.1549 of 2004 motorcycle, due to which injuries were suffered by Rakesh Kumar and Kiran Bharti. Mr. Y.P. Singla, Advocate appearing for Mr. Som Nath Saini, counsel for the petitioner, has stated that PW-3 Rakesh Kumar complainant and PW-4 Kiran Bharti were injured in the occurrence and they have deposed against the petitioner, therefore, he will not be in a position to demolish their testimony. Counsel has prayed that he will not assail the conviction of the petitioner but will pray to this Court that in the present case, occurrence had taken place way back in the year 1999 and due to accident, simple and grievous injuries were suffered by Kiran Bharti and Rakesh Kumar respectively. Therefore, there was no intention on the part of the accused petitioner to cause injuries. Counsel has prayed that the accident had just taken place without any mens-rea therefore, petitioner may be given an opportunity to reform himself and lead a life of rectitude. Counsel has submitted that petitioner has not committed any other offence before or after the present occurrence. It is further submitted that petitioner is ready and willing to compensate the injured. In the present case, petitioner has suffered mental pain and agony of protracted trial for about 11 years. Taking into consideration the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that petitioner can be released on probation under Probation of Offenders Act for a period of one year. He shall furnish personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court with an undertaking that he shall maintain peace, good conduct and behaviour during the period of probation. However, cost of litigation is assessed at Rs.10,000/-. The petitioner shall be called upon by the trial Court to furnish bonds and to deposit the cost. The amount of cost so deposited, shall be disbursed as compensation to the injured proportionately. In case the petitioner commits breach of any of the terms 2 Criminal Revision No.1549 of 2004 and conditions of the bonds, he shall be called upon by the trial Court to undergo the sentence awarded. Non deposit of the amount of cost shall be construed as dismissal of the present revision petition and benefit of probation shall not accrue to the petitioner. With the observations made above, present revision petition is disposed of. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE February 17, 2010 rps 3