IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 471 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: September 05, 2011 Sukhwinder Singh .. Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Arshdeep Singh Sivia, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Bhavna Gupta, D. A.G. Punjab. A.N. Jindal, J Assailed in this petition is the judgment dated 3.2.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Mukatsar Sahib, dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner-accused Sukhwinder Singh (herein referred as, 'the accused') against the judgment dated 24.2.2007 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Mukatsar Sahib, convicting and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of `4000/- under Section 304-A IPC; rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of `1000/- under Section 338 IPC; and rigorous imprisonment for three months under Section 337 IPC. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not assailed the conviction and his only prayer is that since the petitioner has already undergone more than nine months of the substantive sentence and he is sole bread winner of the family, therefore, some leniency may be shown to him on the quantum of sentence. Having examined the impugned judgment, the evidence appears to have been appreciated in the right perspective. Both the courts below have returned concurrent findings of fact that the accused was guilty of the offence for which they were charged. No illegality much less irregularity or perversity has been detected or pointed out warranting interference by this court. As such, no exception to the opinion expressed by the courts below could be made at this revisional stage. Crl. Revision No. 471 of 2011 -2- Now coming to the quantum of sentence, it may be observed that the occurrence took place way back in the year 2003 and two persons died and five were injured in a rash and negligent act of the petitioner. Though, it is a hard case, yet, keeping in view the facts and peculiar circumstances of this case, the ends of justice would be met if some reduction is made in the sentence. Consequently, this petition is dismissed with the modification in the sentence which is reduced to one and a half years without any alteration in the sentence of fine. September 05, 2011 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge