Kuldip Singh vs State Of Punjab
2023 Latest Caselaw 1222 P&H

312    IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH

                                                       CRR-1670-2007
                                                       Decided on : 19.01.2023

Kuldip Singh                                                 ...... Petitioner

                                    Versus

State of Punjab                                              ...... Respondent

CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present :   Mr. P.S.Hundal, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Mr. Amit Rana, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

                          ****

Manjari Nehru Kaul, J.(Oral)

Instant revision petition has been preferred against the

judgment dated 17.10.2006 passed by JMIC, Ist Class, Amritsar vide which

the accused-petitioner was convicted under Section 304-A IPC and

sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and

vide judgment 25.08.2007 the order of conviction was affirmed by the

Appellate Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has fairly submitted that in

view of the findings of fact recorded by both the Courts below, he would

not press the instant revision petition on merits and would instead restrict

his prayer qua the sentence only. Learned counsel submits that the

occurrence in question pertains to the year 1998 and the petitioner has thus,

suffered the agony of trial for the last 24 years. Learned counsel further

submits that the petitioner has been leading the life of a disciplined and

peace loving citizen ever since then and is not involved in any other

1 of 2

criminal case. A prayer, therefore, has been made that in the aforesaid facts

and circumstances, a lenient view may be taken and the quantum of

sentence awarded to the petitioner by the trial Court be reduced to already

undergone as no useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner

behind bars.

The custody certificate, which has been filed by the State

counsel today in Court, does not reflect the involvement of the petitioner in

any other criminal case.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant

material available on record.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case as well

as the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the

considered view that ends of justice would be met, if while maintaining the

conviction of the petitioner his substantive sentence of two years is reduced

to the sentence already undergone by him in the present case.

With this modification, the present petition stands disposed of.

                                                 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL)
                                                         JUDGE
19.01.2023
sonia

               Whether speaking/reasoned:              Yes/No
               Whether reportable :                    Yes/No




                                        2 of 2