Criminal Revision No. 124 of 2002 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No. 124 of 2002 Date of Decision: 23.3.2010 Bhupinder Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. Pankaj Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Mehardeep Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) The present petitioner was named as an accused in case FIR No. 24 dated 31.3.1990, registered at Police Station Dera Bassi, under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-A IPC. The Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rajpura, vide its judgment dated 7.8.2000, found the petitioner guilty of an offence under Section 304-A IPC. However, he was acquitted of charge under Section 337 and 338 IPC. Having convicted the petitioner for an offence under Section 304-A IPC, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2,500/-. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. Criminal Revision No. 124 of 2002 2 Aggrieved against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, passed by the trial Court, the petitioner had filed an appeal. The appeal was dismissed by the lower Appellate Court, vide its judgment dated 16.1.2002, upholding the conviction and maintaining the sentence. The FIR, in the present case, was lodged on the basis of statement made to Lal Singh, Head Constable, by Surinder Mohan Bhanot, who was then posted as Sectional Officer in Haryana Land Reclamation Development Corporation, Chandigarh. He stated that on 31.3.1990, he along with Ved Parkash Arora was going from Chandigarh to Karnal in a Government Gypsy bearing registration No. HNL-8145, which was being driven by Balak Ram. When the gypsy had reached near the Petrol Pump at Dera Bassi, on the bridge of the drain, one truck bearing registration No. DLL-7804 came from the opposite side, which was being driven by the petitioner at a very high speed in a rash and negligent manner. When the petitioner intended to overtake a bus, he could not control the offending vehicle and collided with a gypsy, which was on the kacha portion of the road, due to which Balak Ram, driver of the gypsy died at the spot. Mr. Pankaj Bhardwaj, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner, has very fairly stated that both the Courts below have placed implicit reliance upon the testimony of PW.8 Surinder Mohan Bhanot, Complainant and PW.5 Ved Parkash Arora, who were travelling in gypsy which had met with the accident. He further stated that since both the Courts below have held that the testimonies of these witnesses aspire confidence and are trustworthy, he will not be in a position to assail the Criminal Revision No. 124 of 2002 3 same. However, learned counsel has submitted that in the present case, the occurrence had taken place in the year 1990 and a period of about 20 years is going to elapse. In the last two decades, the petitioner is leading a life of a honest and peaceful citizen. He has not committed any such offence, before the registration of the present case and thereafter. It is further submitted that at the time of accident, the petitioner was aged about 33 years and now he is having a large family to support. Therefore, in case petitioner is sent behind the bars, no useful purpose will be served. The petitioner is, however, ready and willing to pay compensation to the family of deceased Balak Ram. He has already undergone one month and 13 days of his actual sentence out of one year's sentence awarded to him. This Court has considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner. Taking into consideration, the age, antecedents and conduct of the petitioners, this Court is of the view that sending the petitioner behind the bars, at this stage, may not serve any useful purpose, however, if some compensation is awarded to the family of deceased, it may provide some solace. Accordingly, sentence awarded to the petitioner is reduced to already undergone, however, sentence of fine is enhanced to Rs.35,000/-. The petitioner shall deposit the enhanced amount of fine in the trial Court, within three months, from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The amount, so deposited, shall be disbursed to the legal heirs of the deceased. In case the amount of fine is not deposited, no benefit in reduction of sentence shall accrue to the petitioner. Criminal Revision No. 124 of 2002 4 With the observations made above, present revision petition is disposed of. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge March 23, 2010 “DK”