IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 2140 of 2011 Date of decision : 18.10.2011 Sham Lal .....Petitioner VERSUS Jaspreet Singh ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH PRESENT: Mr. A.D.S. Sukhija, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate for Mr. S.S. Narula, Advocate for the respondent. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioner was driving the Contessa car, which met with an accident with Maruti car being driven by the complainant. The accident took place while the Contessa car was in the process of overtaking some other vehicle. For this, the complainant suffered injuries and statedly is suffering from 52% disability. Counsel for the petitioner contends that without making submissions on merits, he would plead for leniency. The petitioner is first offender and has already undergone two months out of six months rigorous imprisonment. This prayer is, however, vehemently opposed by the counsel for the complainant, who says that he is still suffering the effect of injuries. I find that in view of the facts and circumstances, the case for showing leniency is made out. The petitioner has undergone one third part of the sentence. Even otherwise, the petitioner was entitled to be considered for release on probation, which appears to have escaped notice of the court. This has been held to be mandatory Crl. Misc. No. M- 2140 of 2011 -2- requirement. Even without going into this aspect, I deem it appropriate to reduce the sentence imposed on the petitioner to the period already undergone. The revision petition is disposed of accordingly. October 18, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) rts JUDGE