IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH [ 364 CRA-S-1669-SB-2006 Date of Decision:-23.05.2025 MANSA RAM …..APPELLANT Vs. STATE OF HRYANA ….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 was tried by Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, Rewari in a case arising out of FIR No.114 dated 24.09.2005 under Sec-on 307/506 of IPC registered at Police Sta-on Sadar Rewari. A3er trial, the appellant was convicted under Sec-ons 307 and 506 of IPC vide judgment dated 19.08.2006 by the trial Court and he was sentenced to undergo as under: - Under Sec-on 325 IPC : rigorous imprisonment for a period of two and half year and to pay fine of ₹10,000/- with default sentence of two months rigorous imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine Under Sec-on 506 IPC : rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of ₹1,000/- with default sentence of 15 days rigorous imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine 2. Against the abovesaid 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 a3er 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. PRIYANKA 2025.05.23 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-S-1669-SB-2006 4. However as far as the impugned order of sentence is concerned it is no-ced that appellant was convicted under Sec-on 325 IPC for rigorous imprisonment for a period of two and half year and to pay fine of ₹10,000/- with default sentence of two months rigorous imprisonment in case of non- payment of fine and under Sec-on 506 IPC of imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of ₹1000/- with default sentence of 15 days rigorous imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine. 5. Counsel for the respondent-State states that the appellant has already undergone actual custody sentence of 02 months and further states that appellant is neither involved in any other criminal case nor involved in any criminal ac-vity a3er 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 period already undergone by him. As far as fine is concerned, it will remain same. 8. However, it is made clear that amount of fine, if not paid earlier, shall be deposited before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned, within a period of four weeks from today, failing which the appellant will have to carry out the complete sentence as imposed by the trial Court. Disposed of. ( DEEPAK GUPTA ) JUDGE May, 23, 2025 Pry Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes Whether Reportable No PRIYANKA 2025.05.23 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document