Crl. Rev. No.468 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Rev. No.468 of 2011 Date of Decision: 19.04.2011 Bahadur Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM : Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present:- Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Gurveen H. Singh, Addl. A.G., Punjab for the respondent-State. ***** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? ** NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (ORAL) This is a revision petition against the order dated 08.09.2009 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehgarh Sahib, vide which, the petitioner was convicted under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A IPC and the order dated 10.01.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, dismissing the appeal of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, did not argue the case on merits and restricted his prayer for reducing the sentence of petitioner from one year to nine months. The sentence as awarded by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Crl. Rev. No.468 of 2011 2 Fatehgarh Sahib vide order and judgment dated 08.09.2009 is as under :- U/s 279 IPC R.I. for six months U/s 337 IPC R.I. for six months U/s 304-A IPC R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. Taking into account the judgments rendered by the two Courts below, the petitioner has rightly not addressed the case on arguments. Accordingly, the order dated 08.09.2009 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehgarh Sahib, convicting the present petitioner, as well as, the order dated 10.01.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, dismissing the appeal of the petitioner, are upheld. However, taking into account that the petitioner is facing litigation since the year 2000 and has already undergone 04 months and 12 days of the actual sentence, as also taking into account that he has small children who are dependent on him and he is the only bread winner of his family, the short prayer of the petitioner deserves to be accepted. Accordingly, the sentence of the petitioner is reduced from one year under Section 304-A IPC to nine months. In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed except for the modification in the sentence as above. The petitioner shall be released immediately after the completion of nine months of actual sentence. (NIRMALJIT KAUR) 19.04.2011 JUDGE gurpreet