IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 33 of 2009 Date of Decision: February 16, 2009 Charan Singh ...........Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ..........Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Mr.Naveen Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Sidharath Sarup, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana ** Sabina, J. Petitioner-Charan Singh was convicted by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Palwal vide its judgment dated 11.3.2008 under Sections 417/34 IPC and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months along with a fine of Rs.500/- vide order dated 12.3.2008 under the said Sections. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed on 12.12.2008 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad. The brief facts of the case, as noticed by the Appellate Court in para 3 of its judgment, are as under:- “The facts of the prosecution case, in brief, are that a motorcycle bearing registration No. HR 30/4790 was impounded by the police in case FIR No.327 dated 31.5.1995 registered at police station City Palwal under Section 61 of the Punjab Excise Act. Vide order dated 1.6.1995 of the learned Magistrate, the motorcycle was ordered to be released on superdari to the satisfaction of the SHO concerned on furnishing superdginama in Crl. Revision No. 33 of 2009 -2- the sum of Rs.30,000/- with a surety of like amount. The investigating officer of the case accepted the superdginama and released the vehicle in the name of Manmohan Garg, on superdari on surety of Charan Singh. However, Shri Manmohan Aggarwal son of Baljnath appeared before the court on 6.5.1996 and made statement that he had never taken the motorcycle on superdari nor had furnished superdginama taken by the investigating officer. Said Man Mohan Aggarwal denied his signature on the superdginama and further stated that he did not even known Charan Singh who stood surety on the superdginama. On the same day, court recorded the statement of Suresh, the accused of that case, who stated that his father had got the motorcycle released on superdari. Holding that some person impersonating as Man Mohan Aggarwal, had obtained the superdari of the motor cycle by committing fraud on the court, a complaint was made by Sh. B.Dowakar, the then learned SDJM, Palwal to register the FIR and conduct the necessary investigation. 3.On that complaint Ex.PW6/A, FIR was registered under Section 419/420 IPC. Investigation was conducted by HC Kartar Singh, who arrested the accused Charan Singh and Ganga Ram. Specimen signatures of the accused and also that of Man Mohan Aggarwal were obtained. Necessary report was received. Statements of various witnesses were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. After concluding necessary investigation, challan was filed in the court of learned Illaqa Magistrate to prosecute Ganga Ram son of Likhi and Charan Singh (now appellant) son of Crl. Revision No. 33 of 2009 -3- Daryab Singh under Section 419/420 of the Indian Penal Code.” Learned counsel for the petitioner, during the course of arguments, has not challenged the conviction awarded by the Courts below under Section 417/34 IPC. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner has already undergone about two months of actual sentence and prays that the sentence of imprisonment may be reduced to already undergone by the petitioner. The petitioner is not a previous convict. Fine is stated to have been deposited. Keeping in view the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the facts and circumstances of the present case, it is a fit case where the sentence of imprisonment is liable to be reduced to already undergone by the petitioner. However, the sentence qua fine is liable to be enhanced. Accordingly, the conviction of the petitioner under Section 417/34 IPC as ordered by the Courts below is maintained. However, the sentence qua imprisonment is reduced to already undergone by the petitioner and sentence qua fine is enhanced from Rs.500/- to Rs.5000/-. Petitioner, who is in custody be released forthwith, if not wanted in any case , subject to payment of enhanced fine. With the above modification, the revision petition stands disposed of. (Sabina) Judge February 16, 2009 arya