IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 209 CRR-685-2011(O&M) Date of Decision.:27.03.2025 BHUPINDER SINGH …..Pe//oner 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 was tried by Ld. Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, SAS Nagar, Mohali in a case arising out of FIR No.31 dated 31.01.2005 under Secons 25/27/54/59 of the Arms Act registered at Police Staon Mohali. A6er trial, the peoner was convicted under Secon 25 of the Arms Act vide judgment dated 06.10.2009 by the trial Court and was sentenced to undergo rigorous 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. 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 a6er 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 PRIYANKA 2025.03.28 18:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-685-2011 concerned it is noced that peoner was sentenced 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 peoner has already undergone actual custody sentence of 12 days and further states that peoner is neither involved in any other criminal case nor involved in any criminal acvity a6er 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 revision 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 fine is concerned, it will remain same. Disposed of. ( DEEPAK GUPTA ) JUDGE March 27, 2025 Pry Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes Whether Reportable No PRIYANKA 2025.03.28 18:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document