CRIMINAL REVISION NO.638 OF 2011 :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: DECEMBER 19, 2011 Ravi and another .....Petitioners VERSUS State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr. Jarnail Singh Saneja, Advocate, for the petitioner. (in Crl. R. No.638 of 2011) Mr. S. S. Kharb, Advocate, for the petitioner. (in Crl. R. No.1145 of 2011) Mr. Saurabh Mohunta, DAG, Haryana, for the State. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. Since both Criminal Revision Nos.638 of 2011 (Ravi and another Vs. State of Haryana) and 1145 of 2011 (Pardeep @ Sonu @ Ranjit Vs. State of Haryana) are arising out of the common FIR, the same are being decided by this common order. CRIMINAL REVISION NO.638 OF 2011 :{ 2 }: The petitioners are convicted for an offence under Section 394 IPC and sentenced to suffer RI for two and a half years. Notice in these cases was issued qua quantum of sentence only. Counsel for the petitioners contends that out of sentence imposed, the petitioners have already undergone about one year and four months by now. State counsel, on the other hand, points out that some other cases of theft are still pending against petitioner, Ravi, though in one of those cases he has been acquitted. Petitioner, Mandeep, has also been acquitted in one of the case alongwith Ravi. The petitioners are of young age being 19 to 21 years old. At this young age, they are indulging in robbing people. Allegation against the petitioners is that they had robbed an agriculturist a sum of `5,000/-, which was received by him on selling his buffalo. The petitioners also allegedly snatched his mobile phone. The petitioners have nothing much to show to their credit except for being involved in some other cases of similar nature. Having regard to the antecedents of the petitioners, no case for showing any leniency to them is made out. Both the petitions are, therefore, dismissed. December 19, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE