High CourtsSingle Bench(2012) 07 P&H CK 0283

Jaswinder Singh vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 18 July 2012

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sabina, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Revision No. 2008 of 2012 (O and M)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 299 words

Sabina, J.—Petitioner was tried for an offence punishable under Sections 279, 337, 419 of the Indian Penal Code (for short `IPC''). The trial Court vide judgment/order dated 16.11.2011 convicted and sentenced the petitioner qua the commission of offence punishable under Sections 279, 337, 419 IPC. The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the appellate Court vide order dated 9.7.2012. Hence, the present petition. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the present petition deserves dismissal.

2.

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner was driving Tempo bearing registration No. HR-38-C-4658 on 11.6.2005 at about 9.00 P.M. The petitioner struck his tempo against the complainant and, as a result of this, he suffered injuries. Complainant was walking on his left side of the road towards his house. The petitioner disclosed his name as Jasvir Singh son of Dev Raj to the complainant.

3.

Complainant-Baljeet Singh appeared in the witness box as PW1 and deposed as per the contents of the FIR. PW2 Ranjit Singh, brother of the complainant corroborated the statement of the complainant qua the manner of occurrence.

4.

Both the eye witnesses identified the petitioner in the Court. The petitioner was not holding a valid driving licence at the time of accident and had disclosed his name as Jasvir Singh instead of Jaswinder Singh. It has been noticed by the learned Sessions Judge that the licence had been issued to the petitioner after 40 days of the accident. In these circumstances, the Courts below had rightly convicted and sentenced the petitioner qua the commission of offence under Sections 279, 337 and 419 IPC. No ground for releasing the petitioner on probation is made out in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed.