Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 2]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Siri Om vs State Of Haryana on 2 February, 2009

Author: Sabina

Bench: Sabina

      In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh



                              Crl. Revision No. 2675 of 2008(O&M)
                              Date of Decision:February 02, 2009

Siri Om

                                           ---Petitioner

                   versus

State of Haryana


                                           ---Respondent

Coram:       HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA


Present:     Mr.Rakesh Garg,Advocate,
             for the petitioner



SABINA, J.

Petitioner-Siri Om was convicted for an offence under Sections 420, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') vide judgment dated 20.9.2006 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rewari. Vide order dated 21.9.2006 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rewari, petitioner was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 2000/- under Section 420 IPC and was sentenced to undergo two years simple imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000/- for offence under Section 468 IPC and sentence to undergo simple imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 1000/- under Section 471 IPC. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by learned Sessions Judge, Rewari vide judgment dated 4.12.2008.

Crl. Revision No. 2675 of 2008(O&M) -2-

The prosecution story, as noticed in brief by the Appellate Court in para 2 of its judgment is as under:-

" On 24.3.1999, Jagdish Kumar and Siri Krishan Saini Sub Inspector of Haryana Roadways, Rewari Depot checked vehicle No. 563 near Naiwali Chowk. They had found Siri Om son of Gutia Ram, a resident of village Garhi Murli, District Gurgaon travelling in the bus on the basis of a forged identity card of Haryana Raodways Engineering Corporation. He was found to have been so travelling on the basis of the forged identity card for the last eight months. The matter was reported to General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Rewari and Siri Om was produced before General Manager who had made a written complaint Ex. PW3/A on the same day to the SHO, Police station City Rewari and had requested him for taking action against Siri Om. The forged identity card and the writing of the Sub Inspectors as well as the writing of Siri Om whereby he admitted committing a mistake were sent along with the same. On the complaint of General Manager, Haryana Roadways Rewari, Ved Parkash ASI had recorded the formal FIR. He took into possession the forged identity card. The accused who was also produced by Jagdish Kumar and Siri Krishan Sub Inspectors was arrested in the case. As the accused had Crl. Revision No. 2675 of 2008(O&M) -3- stated that the forged identity card was given to him by Ram Bahadur who was working in Haryana Roadways Workshop at Gurgaon, Ram Bahadur was arrested on 31.5.1999. Statements of the witnesses were recorded. On completion of the investigation, challan against the accused was prepared by Siri Chand Inspector/SHO."

Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of arguments has not challenged the conviction of the petitioner as ordered by the courts below. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner is not a previous convict and the allegation against him is that he was found travelling on the basis of a forged identity card. The petitioner is aged about 52 years and was facing criminal proceedings since the year 1999.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, it would be just and expedient to reduce the sentence of imprisonment to already undergone by the petitioner. Fine is stated to have already been deposited by the petitioner. Accordingly, conviction of the petitioner under Sections 420, 468, 417 IPC is maintained. However, the sentence of imprisonment of the petitioner is reduced to already undergone by the petitioner.

Revision petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(SABINA) JUDGE February 02, 2009 PARAMJIT