210 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR-139-2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: April 04, 2025 Jagroop Singh alias Rupa …Pe22oner Versus State of Punjab and others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. Sandeep Shrama, Advocate for the peoner. Mr. Rajeev K. Takkar, DAG, Punjab. DEEPAK GUPTA , J.(Oral) Peoner – Jagroop alias Rupa was tried by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barnala under Secons 279, 337, 427 and 304-A IPC, in a case arising out of FIR No.304 dated 08.10.2001, registered at Police Staon Barnala and was convicted and sentenced as under:- Sr. No. Offence Sentence (R.I) Fine Further sentence in case of non-payment of fine 1. 304-A IPC 01 year `2,000/- R.I. for 02 months 2. 337 IPC 03 months `500/- R.I. for 15 days 3. 427 IPC 06 months `500/- R.I. for 15 days 4. 279 IPC 03 months `500/- R.I. for 15 days All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 2. The appeal against the convicon and sentence was dismissed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Barnala, vide his judgment dated 23.10.2010. 3. Today learned counsel for the peoner stated at the outset that peoner does not press the peon against the judgment of convicon; and that the 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 2001; that peoner was young person of 29 years at that me; that peoner has already undergone actual sentence of 04 months and 30 days, i.e. 05 months 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. Sarita Rani 2025.04.05 09:31 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order CRR-139-2011 (O&M) - 2 - 2025:PHHC:046645 6. The custody cerficate placed on record by the respondent- State would reveal that peoner has already undergone actual custody sentence of 05 months. It is revealed further that he has no criminal antecedents. Nothing has been brought on record to suggest that a?er this convicon, peoner has been involved in any other case. He was young person of 29 years of age at the me of offence, which had taken place way back in 2001 i.e. 24 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. As far as the fine is concerned, it will remain same. Disposed of. April 04, 2025 (DEEPAK GUPTA) sarita JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No Sarita Rani 2025.04.05 09:31 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order