IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 305 CRA-S-2635-SB-2009 (O&M) Date of Decision.: 01.07.2025 Subhash …..Appellant Vs. State of Punjab .….Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- None for the appellant. Ms. Prabha Bali, AAG, Punjab. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Appellant Subhash was tried by Ld. Addional Sessions Judge, Barnala in a case arising out of FIR No.86 dated 02.06.2005 under Secons 457, 458, 459, 411, 380 of the IPC registered at Police Staon Tapa. A4er trial, the appellant was convicted only under Secon 411 IPC vide judgment dated 27.10.2009 by the trial Court, acqui8ng him of other charges. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of ₹250/- with default sentence of 15 days imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine, for commi8ng the offence under Secon 411 IPC. 2. Against the abovesaid convicon 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 convicon has been recorded a4er proper appreciaon of the evidence on record. This Court does not find any reason so as to interfere in the impugned judgment of convicon and as such, the same is hereby maintained. 4. However as far as the impugned order of sentence is NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.07.01 18:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-S-2635-SB-2009 (O&M) -2- concerned it is noced that appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of ₹250/- with default sentence of 15 days imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine. 5. The custody cerficate placed on record by the respondent- State would reveal that appellant has already undergone total custody sentence of 09 months and 18 days. He was 31 years of age at the me of offence, which had taken place way back in 2005 i.e. 20 years back. 6. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it will be in the interest of jusce, 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 convicon, 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. 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 July 01, 2025 Neeka Tuteja Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.07.01 18:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document