IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 202 CRR-2108-2007 (O&M) Date of Decision.:02.07.2025 Ram Babu …..Pe..oner Vs. State of Punjab .….Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. Sunil Kumar Rana, Advocate for Mr. S.S. Siao, Advocate for the peoner. Ms. Prabha Bali, AAG, Punjab. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Peoner Ram Babu was tried by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Camp at Amloh in a case arising out of FIR No.38 dated 21.04.1998 under Secons 279, 337, 304-A of the IPC registered at Police Staon Gobindgarh. A3er trial, the peoner was convicted under Secons 279, 337, 304-A of the IPC vide judgment dated 30.07.2004 by the trial Court and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a maximum period of one year and to pay maximum fine of ₹1,000/- with default sentence of one month rigorous imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine. On appeal, the judgment of convicon and order of sentence were upheld by the Court of learned Addional Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib vide judgment dated 03.10.2007. 2. Against the abovesaid convicon and sentence, this peon was filed. 3. Today learned counsel for the peoner stated at the outset that peoner does not press the peon against the judgment of NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.07.02 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-2108-2007 (O&M) -2- convicon; and that peoner confines his prayer only against order of sentence. It is submi:ed that peoner would be sasfied, in case he is sentenced to imprisonment for the period already undergone by him. 4. Learned counsel points out that offence pertains to the year 1998; that peoner was young person of 27 years at that me; that peoner has already undergone total sentence of 04 months and 11 days and is not involved in any other case and so, he deserves to be sentenced for the period already undergone by him. 5. Learned State counsel has not seriously objected to the aforesaid prayer. 6. The custody cerficate placed on record by the respondent- State would reveal that peoner has already undergone total sentence of 04 months and 11 days. It is revealed further that he had no criminal antecedents. Nothing has been brought on record to suggest that a3er his convicon, peoner has been involved in any other case. He was 27 years of age at the me of offence, which had taken place way back in 1998 i.e. 27 years back. 7. 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 peoner, instead of sending him behind bars in the company of hardened criminals. 8. Consequently, the present peon is partly accepted. By maintaining the impugned judgment against convicon, the order of sentence as passed by the trial Court is modified and the peoner is sentenced to imprisonment for the period already undergone by him. 9. However, it is made clear that amount of fine, if not paid earlier, shall be deposited before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.07.02 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-2108-2007 (O&M) -3- concerned, within a period of four weeks’ from today, failing which the peoner will have to carry out the complete sentence as imposed by the trial Court. Disposed of. ( DEEPAK GUPTA ) JUDGE July 02, 2025 Neeka Tuteja Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.07.02 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document