S. No.104 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CRA-S-2433-SB of 2004 (O&M) Date of Decision:02.04.2025 Rajiv alias Raju .....Appellant Vs. State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- None for the appellant. Mr. R.K.S. Brar, Addl. AG, Haryana. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (Oral) Appellant Rajiv alias Raju was tried by Ld. Addi%onal Sessions Judge, Panchkula in a case arising out of FIR No.134 dated 08.03.2004 under Sec%on 376 and 511 of the IPC registered at Police Sta%on Sector 5, Panchkula, as he was held guilty of kidnapping the prosecutrix aged about eight years from the lawful guardianship of her parents and also a8empted to commit rape upon her. A9er trial, the appellant was convicted under Sec%ons 363, 366 and 376/511 IPC vide judgment dated 12.08.2004 by the trial Court and was sentenced under Sec%on 363 IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay fine of ₹500/- with default sentence of two months simple imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine; under Sec%on 366 IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay fine of ₹500/- with default sentence of two months simple imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine and under Sec%ons 376/511 IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay fine of ₹500/- with default sentence of two months simple imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine. All the substan%ve sentences were directed to run concurrently. RENU 2025.04.03 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-S-2433-SB of 20024 -2- 2. Against the above-said convic%on and sentence, this appeal was filed. 3. Today nobody is appearing on behalf of the appellant. This Court has gone through the impugned judgment of the trial Court and finds that convic%on has been recorded a9er proper apprecia%on of the evidence on record. This Court does not find any reason so as to interfere in the impugned judgment of convic%on and as such, the same is hereby maintained. 4. However as far as the impugned order of sentence is concerned it is no%ced that appellant was sentenced for a period of three years under all the afore-said Sec%ons and to pay fine of ₹500/- with default sentence of two months simple imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine for the afore-said offence. 5. The custody cer%ficate placed on record by the respondent-State would reveal that appellant has already undergone total sentence of 02 years 08 months and 01 days. Custody cer%ficate further indicates that appellant is not in- volved in any other criminal case a9er the impugned convic%on. 6. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it will be in the interest of jus%ce, if the period of imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone by the appellant, instead of sending him behind bars in the company of hardened criminals. 7. Consequently, the present appeal is partly accepted. By maintaining the impugned judgment against convic%on, the order of sentence as passed by the trial Court is modified and the appellant is sentenced to imprisonment for the RENU 2025.04.03 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-S-2433-SB of 20024 -2- period already undergone by him. As far as fine is concerned, it will remain same. Disposed of. April 02, 2025 ( DEEPAK GUPTA ) renu JUDGE Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RENU 2025.04.03 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh