IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 285 CRR-246-2010 (O&M) Date of Decision.: 07.04.2025 Baldev Singh …..Pe33oner Vs. State of Punjab .….Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- None for the peoner. Mr. R.K. Takkar, DAG, Punjab. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Peoner Baldev Singh was tried by Ld. Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Samrala in a case arising out of FIR No.128 dated 30.07.2006 under Secons 452 and 354 IPC registered at Police Staon Samrala, District Ludhiana. A8er trial, the peoner was convicted as under:- Sr. No. Offence Sentence (R.I.) Fine Further Sentence in case of non-payment of fine 1. 452 IPC 01 year ₹500/- R.I. for one month 2. 354 IPC 01 year ₹500/- R.I. for one month Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 2. Against the abovesaid convicon and sentence, this appeal was filed. 3. Today nobody is appearing on behalf of the peoner. This Court has gone through the impugned judgment of the trial Court and finds that convicon has been recorded a8er 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 2025.04.08 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-246-2010 (O&M) -2- concerned it is noced that peoner was sentenced for a period of one year and to pay fine of ₹500/- with default sentence of one month rigorous imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine. 5. The custody cerficate placed on record by the respondent- State would reveal that peoner has already undergone actual custody sentence of 01 month and 13 days. Custody cerficate further indicates that peoner is not involved in any criminal acvity a8er the impugned convicon. 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 peoner, 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 peoner is sentenced to imprisonment for the period already undergone by him. As far as the 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 April 07, 2025 Neeka Tuteja Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.04.08 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document