In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl.Revision No. 1340 of 2007 Date of Decision:March 17, 2009 Jagjit Singh ---Petitioner versus State of Punjab ---Respondent Coram: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA *** Present: Mr. H.N.Mehtani,Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Aman Deep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab *** SABINA, J. Jagjit Singh – petitioner was convicted for an offence under Sections 279/304-A of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) vide judgment dated 1-5-2004 by Civil Judge (Jr. division) Malerkotla. Vide order of even date passed by learned Civil Judge(Jr. Division), Malerkotla, petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 1000/- for offence under Section 304-A IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 500/- for an offence under Section 279 IPC. Aggrieved by the same petitioner preferred an appeal which was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur vide judgment dated 27.4.2007. Hence, the present revision petition. Prosecution story, as noticed by the learned appellate court in Crl.Revision No. 1340 of 2007 -2- para 2 of its judgment is as under:- “As per the case of the prosecution, complainant Iqbal Mohammed got recorded his statement Ex. PA on 26.9.1999 stating therein that for the last 1 ½ years he is residing at Malerkotla, along with his children and working as Oversear in Municipal Council, Malerkotla. Due to Sunday on that day he was present at his house. His brother Naib Din @ Kala and his wife Anwari on their scooter No. PB-10-6547 came to him as they had to go to their village Chakk Sahai. He along with his wife Sangina Begum and his brother-in-law Roopa Khan in his Maruti Van No. PB-10-A 1596 and his brother and his wife being on their scooter were going towards Chakk Sahai. His brother and sister-in-law were ahead of them. Then at about 3.30 p.m. when his brother and wife were 50-60 years behind of bus stand Chhokra and he was 100 yards behind them. Then from the front side a truck bearing No. PB-13-E-9225 came in a rash and negligent manner without blowing any horn and in their presence the truck driver struck the truck directly in the scooter of his brother. Due to striking of truck his brother Naib Din and his wife Anwari died at the spot. The scooter was also badly damaged. Truck driver after parking the truck at the spot ran away later on he came to know that truck was being driven by Babbi alias Jagjit Singh son of Bhupinder Singh resident of Duggri. Said statement was got recorded by the complainant when after leaving his wife Anwari and Roopa Khan he was Crl.Revision No. 1340 of 2007 -3- going to report the matter and I O met them at bus stand Jabo Majra. IO made attestation Ex. P-1 and made endorsement Ex. P-3 on the said statement, resulting into FIR Ex. P-2. The scooter along with the document was taken into police possession through recovery memo Ex. PB Investigating officer prepared inquest report of Anwari as Ex. PG showing site plan into same as Ex. P4 and of Naib Din as Ex. PE. Post Mortem report of Naib Din is Ex. PD and of Anwari in Ex. PF. IO got prepared the post mortem done by moving application Ex. PH. IO prepared rough site plan for the occurrence as Ex. P5. Truck was taken into police possession through recovery memo Ex. P6. Papers relating to the dead bodies after the post mortem were taken into police possession through recovery memo Ex. P7. Mechanical report of the truck was taken into possession through memo Ex. P8. RC. Insurance and driving license of the accused were produced by him on 30.9.1999, which was taken into police possession through memo Ex. P-9. Photographs and negative of the place of occurrence were taken into police possession through recovery memo Ex. P10. At the time of arrest of the accused, his Fard Jamatalasi was prepared as Ex. P11. Mechanical test report of the scooter is Ex. P12 and of the truck is Ex. P13. RC of the scooter is Ex. P14. After the competition of investigation, challan against the accused was presented in the Court.” Crl.Revision No. 1340 of 2007 -4- Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the accident in the present case had taken place on 25.9.1999. Petitioner is facing criminal proceedings since then and has already undergone about five months of actual sentence. Petitioner is not a previous convict. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not challenged the conviction of the petitioner under Sections 279/304-A IPC as ordered by the courts below but has submitted that the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner be reduced to already undergone by him. Keeping in view the facts of this case, it is a fit case where the sentence of imprisonment of the petitioner is liable to be reduced to already undergone by the petitioner. Accordingly, conviction of the petitioner under Sections 279/304-A IPC as ordered by the courts below, is maintained. However, the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner is reduced to already undergone by him. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (SABINA) JUDGE March 17, 2009 PARAMJIT