CRR No.52 of 2014 (O&M)

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

CRR No.52 of 2014 (O&M)

Date of decision:08.09.2014

Gurtej Singh

....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHAVIR S. CHAUHAN

Present:

Mr.Nand Lal Sammi, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

Mr. Rajesh Mehta, Addl.AG, Punjab,

for the State-respondent.

MAHAVIR S. CHAUHAN, J. (ORAL)

Heard.

The petitioner was tried, convicted and sentenced under Section

409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, (in short 'IPC'), to rigorous

imprisonment for three years with fine amounting to Rs.5,000/- and in

default of payment of fine rigorous imprisonment for six months, by learned

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehgarh Sahib (in short 'trial Court'),

vide judgment/order dated 27.04.2012 on proof of the allegation that while

working as Forest Range Officer, he misappropriated an amount of

Rs.30,900/-. Criminal Appeal No.152-RBT of 2012, brought by the

petitioner has been dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Fatehgarh Sahib, (in short 'Appellate Court'), vide judgment/order dated

25.11.2013. To challenge the aforesaid judgment, the petitioner has brought

the instant criminal revision.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

KUMUD VERMA

2014.09.09 10:24

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

High Court Chandigarh

CRR No.52 of 2014 (O&M)

2

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

petitioner does not dispute the correctness of findings of conviction as

recorded by the learned trial Court and affirmed by the learned Appellate

Court, but he prays for leniency as regards quantum of sentence on the plea

that the petitioner is the only bread winner of his family, has lost his job on

account of the instant proceedings and has been facing the agony of

investigation, trial and consequent proceedings since 22.06.2006. It is also

informed that the petitioner has already spent 9 months and 18 days in

custody.

In view of the foregoing circumstances, while maintaining the

judgment of conviction as recorded by the learned trial Court and affirmed

by the learned Appellate Court, I modify the order on quantum of sentence

and reduce the substantive sentence awarded to the petitioner to the period

already spent by him in custody. Sentence as regards fine and default clause

are however maintained. With the aforesaid modification in the order on

quantum of sentence, the petition fails and is dismissed.

(MAHAVIR S. CHAUHAN)

JUDGE

08.09.2014

Kumud

KUMUD VERMA

2014.09.09 10:24

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

High Court Chandigarh