IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.244 of 2005 Date of Decision 11.11.2010 Pal Singh ...... Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab ...... Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.R.K.Dadwal, Advocate with Mr.Mandeep Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Amit Chaudhary, Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent-State. ***** A.N.JINDAL, J: Assailed in this petition is the judgment dated 21.01.2005, passed by the Appellate Court, dismissing the appeal against the judgment dated 10.04.2003, passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar, convicting and sentencing the petitioner-accused (herein referred as 'the petitioner') to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months under Section 279 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for a period of 1½ years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 304-A IPC. The allegations against the petitioner are that on 01.10.1981, he while driving the truck bearing registration No.PUN-796 at a high speed and without blowing any horn, struck against the rickshaw of complainant Harnam Singh, resultantly, he alongwith children sitting in the said rickshaw fell down; one child namely Bharat Bhushan received injury in his head and he died at the spot. Consequently, he was charged, tried, convicted and sentenced accordingly. His appeal also failed. Criminal Revision No.244 of 2005 -2- Without assailing the judgment of conviction, some leniency on the quantum of sentence has been sought. Even otherwise, on scrutiny of the impugned judgment, it transpires that the evidence led by the prosecution appears to have been appreciated in the right perspective. No such illegality much less irregularity or perversity was found or detected in the conduct of trial or procedure, which may result into miscarriage of justice, therefore, the findings returned by the Courts below regarding conviction do not call for any interference at this revisional stage. Now coming to the quantum of sentence, the occurrence is of the year 1981; a small child had died; the petitioner has already suffered a lot of agony on account of the pendency of proceedings for the last twenty nine years; the sword of sentence remained hanging over his head since then and he has already undergone more than 3½ months of the substantive sentence, therefore, it is a fit case in which some reduction in the sentence could be made. Resultantly, this petition is dismissed with the modification in the sentence which is reduced to one year without any alteration in the sentence of fine. Copy of the order be sent to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar, for compliance. (A.N.Jindal) Judge 11.11.2010 mamta-II