In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Revision No. 843 of 2001 Date of Decision:March 23, 2009 Harvinder Singh ---Petitioner versus C.B.I, Punjab ---Respondent Coram: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA *** Present: Mr. Bipin Ghai, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Rajneish Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ajay Kaushik, Advocate, Central Government Standing counsel for CBI *** SABINA, J. Harvinder Singh-petitioner was convicted for an offence under Sections 120-B read with Sections 420, 420, 419,467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') vide judgment dated 8.5.1995 by Special Judicial Magistrate, Patiala along with his co-accused- Raunak Chand. Vide order of even date passed by learned Special Judicial Magistrate, Patiala, petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for offence under Section 120B read with Section 420 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 500/- for offence under Section 420 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 500/- for Crl. Revision No. 843 of 2001 -2- offence under Section 467 IPC and sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 500/- for offence under Section 468 IPC and sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 500/- for offence under Section 471 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for offence under Section 419 IPC. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala vide judgment dated 17.4.2001. Hence, the present revision petition. Prosecution story, in brief, as noticed by the learned Appellate Court in para 2 of its judgment, is as under:- “The prosecution case in brief is that in the year 1990 both the appellants/accused along with their co-accused Ashok Kumar, a bank managerO.P.Arora and an accountant Khushal Chand entered into a criminal conspiracy to cheat State Bank of Patiala, Main Branch, Rajpura in pursuance of which one of them, namely, Raunak Chand opened a current account No. 2392/19 in the fictitious name of Pawan Kumar Proprietor of M/s Luxmi Steel Industries Rajpura, ( a non existing firm) on 13.2.1990 in State Bank of Patiala, Rajpura on forged and false introduction of Ashok Kumar, partner of M/s Punjab Rice Traders, Rajpura. The said accused operated the account and posing himself to be Pawan Kumar firstly withdrew a sum of Rs. 11,700/- and then deposited Rs. 300/- on 30.5.90 and the balance in the account was struck at Rs. 800/- in the ledger. Crl. Revision No. 843 of 2001 -3- The bank employee namely, Khushal Chand who authenticated the balance on 30.5.90 did not indicate the balance in digits. The accused in connivance with the bank officials inserted/got inserted the figure '191' before the credit amount of Rs. 300/- and before the balance amount of Rs. 800/- in the ledger sheet of the account to make the same to read as Rs. 1,91,300/- in the credit column and Rs. 1,91,800/- in the balance amount. Later on a cheque No. 249490 dated `1.6.90 for Rs. 1,60,000/- was tendered for payment by accused Raunak Chand posing himself as Pawan Kumar. Said cheque was passed by Sh. O.P.Arora, the accountant of the bank.” Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of arguments has not challenged the conviction of the petitioner under Sections 120-B read with Sections 420, 420, 419,467, 468, 471 IPC but has submitted that occurrence in this case relates to the year 1990 and the petitioner is facing criminal proceedings since then. Learned counsel has submitted that sentence qua imprisonment be reduced to already undergone by the petitioner but sentence qua fine be enhanced as the allegation levelled against the petitioner is that he had misappropriated a sum of Rs. 9000/-. Keeping in view the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, it is a fit case where the sentence of imprisonment is liable to be reduced to already undergone by the petitioner and sentence qua fine is liable to be enhanced. Accordingly, conviction of the petitioner under Section 120-B read with Sections 420, 420, 419,467, 468, 471 IPC Crl. Revision No. 843 of 2001 -4- is maintained. However, sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner is reduced to already undergone by him and fine of Rs. 2000/- in all is enhanced to Rs. 1 lac. Out of this amount, Rs. 80,000/- be disbursed to the State Bank of Patiala, Main Branch, Rajpura as compensation. Petitioner is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of fine within three months from today failing which the revision petition shall stand dismissed. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (SABINA) JUDGE March 23, 2009 PARAMJIT