High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRR/383/2015disposed of

Malook Singh v. State Of Punjab

2015-08-19Mr Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain2 pages

Crl. Revision No. 383 of 2015 -1- In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Revision No. 383 of 2015 Date of decision: 19.8.2015 Malook Singh ......Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

Present:

Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. J.S.Sekhon, AAG, Punjab.

**** SABINA, J.

Petitioner had faced the trial qua commission of offence punishable under Section 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC' for short) in FIR No. 241 dated 6.9.2005, registered at Police Station City Malout. Trial Court vide judgment/order dated 7.10.2013 ordered the conviction and sentence of the petitioner under Section 467, 468, 471 IPC. Aggrieved against the said judgment/order of his conviction and sentence, petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by the Appellate Court vide order dated 8.1.2015. However, sentence awarded to the petitioner by the Trial Court was reduced from rigorous imprisonment for 3 years to rigorous imprisonment for 2 years. Hence, the present petition by the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has undergone more than six months of actual sentence. Learned counsel has further submitted that in fact, petitioner GURPREET SINGH 2015.08.25 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Crl. Revision No. 383 of 2015 -2aspired to go abroad and had furnished the certificate qua his agricultural income. As per the revenue record, father of the petitioner owned 190 kanals 10 marlas of land. Nobody had suffered any loss. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he does not challenge the conviction of the petitioner under Section 467, 468, 471 IPC but has submitted that sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner be reduced to the period already undergone by him. Petitioner is not involved in any other case and is the only bread earner of his family.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, it would be just and expedient to reduce the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner to the period already undergone by him.

Accordingly, conviction of the petitioner under Section 467, 468, 471 IPC is maintained. However, sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner is reduced to the period already undergone by him. Petitioner, who is in custody, be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case. Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(SABINA) JUDGE August 19, 2015 Gurpreet GURPREET SINGH 2015.08.25 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh