Criminal Revision No. 744 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Revision No. 744 of 2009 Date of decision: 30.7.2009 Kirpal Singh Petitioner Versus State of Haryana Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Surender Deswal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Dhir, AAG, Haryana. Rajan Gupta, J. Petitioner Kirpal Singh has been convicted by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Panipat, under Sections 279/337/304-A IPC vide judgment dated 13-11-2007. He has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-under Section 279 IPC, imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.250 under Section 337 IPC and to undergo imprisonment for two years & a fine of Rs. 2000/- under Section 304-A IPC. In default of payment of fine, he has been ordered to suffer further imprisonment for one month. The petitioner preferred an appeal against his conviction/sentence, which was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat vide judgment dated 6-1-2009. Feeling aggrieved against the judgments of both the Courts below, he has preferred the instant Criminal Revision. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that he is limiting his prayer only to the extent of reduction in the sentence awarded and does not Criminal Revision No. 744 of 2009 2 assail the judgment of conviction. I have heard learned counsel for both the sides. Briefly, the prosecution case runs thus: On 10-10-2000, Randhir Singh complainant was going on his motorcycle bearing registration No. HR-40-4685. One Teka accompanied him as a pillion rider. A Maruti car without number plate bring driven in a rash & negligent manner by Kirpal Singh, accused/petitioner struck against the said motorcycle. Both of them fell down from the motorcycle and sustained injuries. Teka succumbed to injuries while on way to the hospital. To substantiate its case against the accused/petitioner, the prosecution examined five witnesses. The statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded, wherein the incriminating evidence available on record was put to them. He denied the same and pleaded false implication. On the basis of the evidence on record, the learned trial court held the petitioner were guilty of the charge framed against him and sentenced him as already indicated above. On a perusal of the judgments of both the Courts below, I am of the considered view that the Courts below have rightly appreciated the evidence on record and arrived at a conclusion that the petitioner was guilty of the offence alleged against him. The conviction of the petitioner is, thus, affirmed. Even counsel for the petitioner during the course of arguments, has not assailed the judgment of conviction. He has however, pleaded for reduction in the quantum of sentence on the ground that the petitioner is the first offender, he is having young children to look after and has already Criminal Revision No. 744 of 2009 3 faced the agony of protracted trial for the last nine years. As per affidavit of the Superintendent, District Jail, Karnal, dated 17-5-2009 the petitioner had undergone 4 months & 11 day by that time. Keeping in view facts and circumstances of the case as also the fact that the petitioner is a first offender, sentence awarded to him by the trial Court is reduced to the period already undergone. However, the amount of fine imposed upon him is enhanced to Rs.30,000/-(thirty thousand) to be disbursed to legal heirs of Teka deceased as compensation. The petitioner is directed to deposit the said amount before the trial Court within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The amount of fine, if deposited shall be disbursed to the legal heirs of Teka deceased. However, in case fine aforesaid is not deposited within the period as directed, the modification in quantum of sentence shall stand withdrawn. The revision petition stands dismissed accordingly. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE July 30, 2009 'ask'