IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 11.11.2025 Raj Kumar ......Petitioner Vs.

State of Punjab .....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. GREWAL Present: Mr. P. S. Sullar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Rishabh Singla, AAG, Punjab.

***

H.S. GREWAL , J. (ORAL)

1. The present revision petition has been filed against the impugned judgment dated 28.08.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mohali, whereby the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.06.2012 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dera Bassi, has been upheld. Vide the said judgment, the petitioner was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 338, and 304-A of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years, along with a fine of ₹2,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 10.06.2007, the complainant was riding his scooter bearing No. HR-01-H-4818, while his son, Jaswinder Singh, along with Navneet Singh @ Navi, son of Gurbachan Singh (cousin brother of the complainant’s daughter-in-law), were riding a motorcycle bearing No. CH-034-7510. They left their village for Zirakpur at about 7:45 p.m. in connection with some domestic work. When they reached a point slightly ahead of village Lohgarh, a car bearing No. CH-03-P-2678 (make Accent), being driven in a rash and negligent manner at a high speed by its driver, came from the opposite direction and struck the motorcycle driven by Jaswinder Singh. As a result of the impact, Jaswinder Singh and Navneet Singh sustained injuries and the motorcycle was damaged. The name of the driver of the alleged motorcycle later found to be Raj Kumar, son of Gurdev Singh, resident of Budha, Police Station Zirakpur. Both injured persons were taken to GMCH, Sector-32, Chandigarh, where Navneet Singh succumbed to his injuries, and Jaswinder Singh was referred to PGI, Chandigarh. Thereafter, a formal FIR, i.e., FIR No. 106 dated 11.06.2007, was registered under Sections 279, 338, and 304-A IPC at Police Station Zirakpur against the driver of the offending vehicle. After considering the evidence and hearing both sides, the learned trial Court convicted Raj Kumar and sentenced him to undergo two years’ imprisonment. Aggrieved therefrom, Raj Kumar preferred an appeal before the learned appellate Court, which upheld the conviction and sentence. Still aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present revision petition before this Court.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that he is not assailing the impugned judgment of conviction dated 28.08.2014 on merits and restricts his prayer qua modification of the order on quantum of sentence, to the period as already undergone by the petitioner, as he has already undergone a period of 07 months and 12 days out of total sentence of 2 year. He further prays that since the FIR in question pertains to the year 2007, a lenient view may be taken while passing an order/ judgment by this Court.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer of the petitioner by way of filing of custody certificate dated 10.11.2025 and submits that the learned Courts below have passed well-reasoned judgments based on correct appreciation of evidence available on record.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material placed on record.

6. The petitioner has been convicted for rash and negligent driving and for causing death of a person, for which no minimum punishment has been prescribed. Moreover, the FIR in the present case pertains to the year 2007 and the petitioner has already faced the rigours of the trial for more than 18 years.

7. Hon’ble the Supreme Court in “Deo Narain Mandal Vs. State of UP”, (2004) 7 SCC 257, has held that awarding of sentence is not a mere formality in criminal cases. When a minimum and maximum te