Raj Kumar v. State of Punjab

IN T

Raj Kumar State of Punjab

CORAM : HON

Present: Mr

Mr

H.S.GREWAL

1.

Th conviction and Divisional Judi offences punish undergo rigorou Rs.2000/- and imprisonment fo judgment dated judgment of con by the learned S

2.

Bri Singh, resident o

08.11.2006, his Singh resident o THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ AT CHANDIGA -.-

CR Da

VERSUS

N'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GR r. Ajay K. Yadav, Advocate for th r. S.S.Nahar, AAG Punjab. -.- L J. (Oral)

he present revision petition has order of sentence dated 03.03 icial Magistrate, Malerkotla, hable under Sections 279/304-A us imprisonment for a period o in default of payment of fi for a period of 15 days. The pe

16.02.2012, whereby the appea nviction and order of sentence da Sessions Judge, Sangrur. ief facts of the case are that on 09 of Bhasaur suffered a statement son Gurwinder Singh and his of Bhasaur was going on motor-

JAB AND HARYANA ARH RR-641-2012 (O&M) ate of Decision : 13.05.2026

....Petitioner ....Respondent REWAL the petitioner. been filed against the judgment

3.2011, whereby the learned S convicted the petitioner for A/337 IPC and sentenced him of two years and to pay a fine fine, to further undergo rigor etitioner has further challenged al filed by the petitioner against ated 03.03.2011 has been dismis

9.11.2006 Ajit Singh son of Dalj with the police to the effect that friend Baljeet Singh son of Jarn -cycle make Hero Handa CD Da

t of Sub m to e of rous ssed jeet t on nail

bearing registra which was bein Bhupinder Sing cycle make CT Gurwinder Sing health of Bhan S office of Libra going on their m road. One oil t driver without th giving any sign driven by his so motor cycle fel and Baljeet Sin (complainant) a Singh at Civil H suffered with m Patiala. They to came to know Parbhu Ram, res Delhi. On recei lodging the FIR whereof, challan

3.

At assailing the ju ation No.PB-13Q-2135-owned b ng driven by his son Gurwind gh son of Gurdev Singh resident T Bajaj bearing registration No gh. They all were going to the D Singh, their relative. At about 8 Bus Service, his son Gurwind motor cycle 50 yards ahead of th tanker bearing registration No.H he help of any cleaner/conductor nal, in a rash and negligent mann on Gurwinder Singh. Gurwinder l down on the ground. On acco ngh suffered injuries and mot and Bhupinder Singh got admit Hospital, Malerkotla, where Gu many injuries, Baljeet Singh w ook Baljeet Singh to Arora Ne about the name and address o sident of Ram Nagar colony, Ho iving this narration of the incid R under reference and launched n against the accused was presen this stage, learned counsel for udgment of conviction on meri

by his elder son Amritpal Sin der Singh. He (complainant) a t of Bhasaur were going on mot o.PB-28C-0757 owned by his DMC, Ludhiana to inquire about :00 PM when they reached near der Singh and Baljeet Singh w hem. They were on their side of HR-46-5932 was driven back by r, without giving lights and with ner, struck against the motor cy Singh and Baljeet Singh alongw ount of accident, Gurwinder Sin tor cycle was also damaged. tted Gurwinder Singh and Balj urwinder Singh died. Due to be was referred to Rajindra Hospi euro Centre, Patiala. Lateron, th f the driver as Raj Kumar son ouse No. 34, Nazabgarh, Road, N dent, police swung into action its investigation, upon complet nted in the court. the petitioner states that he is its, rather restricts his prayer q

ngh, tor-son were f the y its hout ycle with ngh He jeet eing ital, hey n of New by tion not

modification of petitioner has b without referrin taking a lenient he has already u total sentence of

4.

On petitioner by wa the ground that after taking into record and there

5.

I ha material placed

6.

The the petitioner is therefore, at pre the learned State and 25 days incl

7.

Ho UP", (2004) 7 S in criminal cas statute with reg the Court. Back offence, the man be considered w f the order of sentence to the been suffering the agony of tria g to the merits of the case, he pr view on the ground that the peti undergone sentence of more than f 2 years. n the other hand, learned State ay of filing of custody certificate t the learned Courts below hav o consideration the entire evide e is no perversity or illegality in t ave heard learned counsel for the on record. e FIR in the present case pertain s facing trial. At the time of co esent he must be above 80 years. e counsel, the petitioner has und luding remissions out of the subs n'ble the Supreme Court in "D SCC 257, has held that awarding es. When a minimum and ma ard to the period of sentence, a kground of each case, which in nner in which the offence is com while determining the quantum o

period already undergone as l since 2006. He also submits t rays for reduction of sentence wh itioner is above 80 years of age a n 05 months and 25 days out of counsel opposes the prayer of e of petitioner dated 12.05.2026 ve passed well-reasoned judgme ence and the material available the findings returned by it. e parties and have gone through ns to the year 2006 and since th onviction, he was 68 years of a . As per custody certificate filed dergone total sentence of 05 mon stantive sentence awarded to him Deo Narain Mandal Vs. State g of sentence is not a mere forma aximum term is prescribed by a discretionary element is vested ncludes factors like gravity of mmitted, age of the accused, sho f sentence and this discretion is

that hile 6 on ents on hen age, d by nths m. e of ality d in ould

to be used arbit sentence should ensure the sente

8.

Fur Sasikala Vs. St sentence also s accused realise large. The law i be granted and circumstances o which the crime between the effi

9.

A p Court indicates appreciation of petitioner has n the prayer only already undergo

10.

As worthwhile to n right to speedy rights guarantee of protracted tri the corridors of above, the case trarily or whimsically. After as d be awarded bearing in mind ence is neither excessively harsh rther, a two-Judges Bench of the tate of AP, AIR 2017 SC 116 serves a social purpose, as it a the damage caused not only to t in this regard is well settled that d such discretion is to be exer of each case by noticing the na e was committed and conduct icacy of law and the chances of r perusal of the judgment of con no perversity in its findings a evidence available on record. not assailed the judgment of con qua modification of quantum o one by petitioner. far as the question of quantu note that the occurrence in this c and expeditious trial is one of ed under the Constitution. Petitio ial, spanning over a period of m f the Court for this prolonged p e of petitioner deserves to be d

sessing all relevant factors, pro the principle of proportionality nor does it come across as lenien e Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rava 6, has held that the imposition acts as a deterrent by making the victim, but also to the society t opportunities of reformation m rcised by evaluating all attend ature of the crime, the manner of the accused to strike a bala reformation of the accused. nviction passed by the learned t and the same is based on corr However, learned counsel for nviction on merits, rather restric of sentence to that of the sente um of sentence in concerned, it case pertains to the year 2006. T f the most valuable and cherish oner has already suffered the ago more than 20 years and have been period. In view of the facts no dealt with leniency. Petitioner a

oper y to nt. ada n of y at must ding , in nce trial rect cted nce t is The hed ony n in oted

deserves the ben guided by the ju cases of Haripa and Alister Ant State of Mahar circumstances o that he faced fin of the view that is reduced to the

11.

Acc well as the lea affirmed but th Sections 279/30 sentence as alre His bail bonds a

12.

Wi

13.

Pe

May 13, 2026 tripti

Whethe

Whethe

nefit of the consistent view taken udicial pronouncements made by ada Das Vs. State of West Bang thony Pareira vs. [2023:RJ-JD: rashtra reported in 2012 2 SCC of the case, age of petitioner, hi nancial hardship and had to go t t ends of justice would be met, i e period as already undergone by cordingly, the judgments passed arned Sub Division Judicial M he quantum of sentence awarde 04-A/337 IPC has been modif ady undergone by him. Petitione are discharged. th these modifications, the prese ending application(s), if any, shal

er speaking/non-speaking : Speak er reportable

: Yes/N

n by this Court in this regard. Th y the Hon'ble Supreme Court in gal reported in (1998) 9 SCC 6 :28174] (5 of 5) [CRLR-755/20 C 648 and considering the facts a is status in the society and the f through mental agony, this Cour if sentence imposed upon petitio y him. d by the learned Appellate Court Magistrate, Malerkotla are here ed by the Courts concerned un fied and reduced to the period er is on bail. He need not surrend ent revision petition is disposed o ll also stand disposed.

(H.S.GREWAL) JUDGE king

hus, 003] fact rt is oner t as eby nder d of der.