Criminal Revision No. 367 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 367 of 2008 Date of Decision:November 29, 2010 Rustam and another ...........Petitioners Versus State of Haryana ..........Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Mr.S.K.Bawa,Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Satyavir Singh Yadav, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana ** Sabina, J. Petitioners were convicted for an offence under Sections 498-A, 406 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (`IPC' for short) vide judgment dated 10.5.2007 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate Ferozepur. Vide order dated 11.5.2007, petitioners were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each under Section 498-A IPC; they were further ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 406 IPC and were also ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months under Section 506 IPC . Aggrieved by the same, petitioners had preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge Criminal Revision No. 367 of 2008 2 Fast Track Court, Gurgaon vide judgment dated 14.1.2008. Hence, the present revision petition. The brief facts of the case, as noticed by the Appellate Court in para 3 of its judgment, are as under:- “3. Prosecution case in brief is that Rasmeena complainant filed complaint against above named accused and against one Warisha daughter of Rustam u/s 498A/406/506 IPC and that complaint was sent to the police u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. On the basis of which the case was registered and investigated. It is alleged by the complainant that she was married with Musthak on 5.5.95 in Pinangwa according with Muslim Rites and Ceremonies. The father of the complainant had spent more than his capacity and dowry articles which were given to the accused were taken to the house by the accused in a tractor. It is further alleged that accused were not happy with the dowry given and they started maltreating the complainant. A demand for Hero Honda motor cycle was raised. It is further alleged that complainant was kept hungry and was also given bearing. On 17.4.2001 all the accused gave mercilessly beating to the complainant and she was confined in a room. It is further alleged that Ashiya and Warisha accused held the complainant by hair. Musthak accused gave slap and also gave her beating with stick while Warisha accused kicked her. It is also alleged that accused no. 1 and 2 namely Rustam and Warisha also caught hold of her while accused namely Ashiya and Rahis had removed her ornaments. On 12.4.2001 she was taken to bus stand Pinangwa and was left there. She was told that in Criminal Revision No. 367 of 2008 3 case her father failed to give the motor cycle she would not be allowed to come to the house and would be killed. Panchayat was also taken but to no effect. Accused were arrested and on completion of investigation challan was put up.” Learned counsel for the petitioners, during the course of arguments, has not challenged the conviction of the petitioners under Sections 498-A, 406 and 506 IPC but has submitted that the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioners be reduced to already undergone by them. As per the custody certificates of the petitioners placed on record by the learned State counsel, the petitioners have undergone one month and fifteen days of actual sentence and are not involved in any other criminal case. Fine is stated to have already been deposited by the petitioners. Keeping in view facts and circumstances of the case, it is a fit case where the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioners is liable to be reduced to already undergone by them. Accordingly, the conviction of the petitioners under Sections 498-A, 406 and 506 IPC is maintained. However, the sentence qua the imprisonment of the petitioners is reduced to already undergone by them. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. ( Sabina ) Judge November 29, 2010 arya