JUDGMENT :

Anil Kshetarpal, J.

1. The petitioner is a convict who has assailed the correctness of the impugned judgments passed by the trial Court and the Appellate Court convicting him under Section 420 IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment thereof, to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of one month.

2. Normally, while hearing the revision petition under Section 401 Cr.P.C., the High Court is not required to re-appreciate the evidence unless the attention of the court is drawn to any substantial error or perversity in the impugned judgments. However, on the first reading of the impugned judgments, this Bench was prompted to examine the case deeply, although, learned counsel representing the petitioner had addressed the Court only on the aspect of reduction of the sentence to the period already undergone.

3. In short, the case of the prosecution is that the FIR No. 160, dated 10.12.2015, was registered on the basis of an application moved on 13.03.2015 by Mohan Lal to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Hoshiarpur, alleging that the petitioner defrauded his son Vijay Kumar of Rs.1,00,000/- on