Ravinder Kumar @ Minto v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRR No.4658 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: April 06, 2017 Ravinder Kumar alias Minto

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.H.S.Hooda, Senior Advocate with Mr.Vivek Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Kuldeep Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent-State.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

The present revision has been filed by the petitioner Ravinder Kumar alias Minto against respondent State of Haryana, challenging the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.05.2014 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Karnal, vide which the petitioner was convicted under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years under each Section along with fine and also challenging the judgment dated 21.10.2016 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Karnal, vide which appeal filed by petitioner was dismissed. Co-accused Shish Pal was declared Proclaimed Offender by learned trial Court. Vineet Gulati 2017.04.07 15:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh At the time of preliminary hearing, the conviction of the

CRR No.4658 of 2016 -2petitioner was upheld vide detailed order dated 27.01.2017 and notice of motion was issued only qua quantum of sentence. Learned State counsel appeared and contested the petition. At the time of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is poor person, first offender, only bread earner of the family and he is suffering from the criminal proceedings since 2010. 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 petitioner is stated to be poor person, first offender, only bread earner of the family and facing criminal proceedings since 2010 i.e.

for the last about 7 years, the sentence imposed upon the petitioner is reduced and he is directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year instead of three years under each Section i.e. Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. However, sentence of fine under each Section and in default thereof shall remain the same. With the above-said modification in the sentence, the present revision petition stands dismissed.

April 06, 2017 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Vineet Gulati 2017.04.07 15:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh