← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRR/4424/2016allowed

Narinder Singh v. State Of Punjab

2017-03-27Mr. Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRR No.4424 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: March 27, 2017 Narinder Singh

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Jitender Singh Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Deep Singh, Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

The present revision has been filed by the petitioner Narinder Singh against respondent State of Punjab, challenging the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.09.2016 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Pathankot, vide which the petitioner was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of `500/- under Section 279 IPC and further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of `1000/- under Section 338 IPC and also to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of `500/- under Section 427 IPC and also challenging the judgment dated 16.11.2016 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Pathankot, vide which appeal filed by petitioner was

-2dismissed. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. At the time of preliminary hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner did not dispute the concurrent findings of the Courts below regarding conviction and only contended on the point of reduction of sentence.

Notice of motion was issued only qua quantum of sentence. Learned State counsel appeared and contested the petition. From the record, I find that the challan was presented against petitioner in case FIR No.23 dated 22.05.2015. The brief facts of the case as noted down in the judgment passed by learned JMIC, Pathankot, are as under:- "2. The present case was registered on the basis of statement of Darshan Singh S/o Nanak Singh, recorded by ASI Satish Kumar on 22.05.2015 that on 17.05.2015 Rajan Sharma S/o Janak Raj who is serving in army and has come home on one month leave, has gone to Mirthal on his motorcycle bearing no. PB-06-W-6178 make hero honda pulsar in order to fetch diesel alongwith Gautam Singh.

That they was returning to their village Mirpur from Mirthal and Rajan Sharma was ridding the motorcycle and Gautam Singh was pillion ridder. That he alongwith Sarpanch Karan Singh were following them on his motorcycle. That at about 9.00 PM when Rajan Sharma reached at G.T. road 100 meter away from D.S.Crusher then a Hyundai car bearing no.PB-30-G-6583 came at a very high speed. That driver was driving the car in a very rash manner and he hit the car in motorcycle of Rajan Sharma by coming on the wrong side of the road. That due to the collision Rajan Sharma and Gautam Singh fell down on the road and received injuries. That motorcycle of Rajan Sharma was also damaged. That driver ran away from the spot and he alongwith Karan Singh gave information of the accident to father of Rajan Sharma who came on the spot.

That they arranged vehicle and took both the injured to Civil hospital Mukeriyan where injured were referred to Jallandhar after giving them first aid. That accident took place due to rash and negligent act of the driver. After recording the statement of the complainant formal FIR was lodged, investigation started.

-3vehicles involved in the accident were taken into police possession and on completion of necessary investigation challan was presented in the Court against the accused by the police."

Learned JMIC, Pathankot, after appreciating the evidence, convicted and sentenced the petitioner as stated above. An appeal was filed by the petitioner and the same was dismissed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Pathankot, vide judgment dated 16.11.2016. Aggrieved from the above-said judgments, present revision petition has been filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner is first offender and he is suffering from the criminal proceedings since 2015 and prayed for reduction of sentence imposed upon the petitioner. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and in view of the fact that the petitioner is stated to be first offender and in view of the fact the petitioner is suffering from criminal proceedings since 2015 i.e.

for the last about two years, the sentence imposed upon the petitioner is reduced and he is directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months instead of one year under Sections 338 and 427 IPC each, subject to the condition that petitioner will pay compensation of `50,000/- to each of the injured to be deposited before the trial Court within one month from the date of receiving of certified copy of this order. However, other sentence, sentence of fine, will remain the same. All the sentences shall run concurrently. As argued, fine has already been paid.

-4accused-petitioner to each injured, as per law. With the above-said modification in the sentence, the present revision petition stands partly allowed.

March 27, 2017 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No