Nitin Khosla vs State of Haryana

Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.—Challange in this criminal revision petition is to the judgment dated 02.12.2011, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panchkula, whereby the appeal of the present petitioner was dismissed. The petitioner was held guilty for the offence punishable u/s 324, IPC and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist class, Panchkula, vide his judgment dated 19.10.2010.

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he does not press the criminal revision on merits but confines his submissions with regard to the quantum of sentence only.

Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 30.12.2000, at about 12:50 a.m,police received an information with regard to admission of injured Sant Ram in CHC Kalka. By the time, the police reached CHC, Kalka, the injured was found to have already been referred to PGI, Chandigarh. The police also reached PGI, Chandigarh, where Kewal Krishan, brother of injured, met the police and got recorded his statement to the effect that at about 9:45 pm, Kewal Krishan and his brother, Sant Ram, were going in a car which was stopped at the STD booth for making call. In the meantime, petitioner also reached there in a car and while reversing his vehicle, he hit the same against the vehicle of the complainant party. When Sant Ram petitioner asked to drive the vehicle carefully, he alighted from his vehicle and gave a knife blow on the face of Sant Ram. The complainant and Mahesh Kumar rescued the injured from the clutches of the accused / petitioner.

After scanning the whole evidence, learned trial Court held the petitioner-accused guilty for the offence punishable u/s 324, IPC, and awarded rigorous imprisonment for two years. The appeal filed by the appellant also failed and hence, the present revision petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the case file very carefully.

Perusal of the material available on record would reveal that there was no previous enmity between the petitioner and the injured. The occurrence had taken place all of a sudden on a spur of the moment on account of a road rage. The incident is 12 years old. The petitioner is neither required nor involved in any other case. The custody certificate would reveal that the petitioner has undergone approximately two months and twenty days of the substantive sentence. He has already suffered the agony of trial and appeal for almost twelve years. The injury received by the injured has healed. Now there is no animosity amongst the two factions. No other untoward incident has occurred after the occurrence.

Keeping in view the totality of the circumstances of the case, it is deemed appropriate to reduce the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner to the period already undergone. Ordered accordingly. However, the petitioner is directed to pay Rs. 15,000/- as compensation to injured Sant Ram. The said amount shall be deposited by the petitioner with learned trial Court within one month from the date of passing of this order. On doing so, learned trial Court shall issue notice to the injured, Sant Ram, to receive the said amount in accordance with law. In case, the petitioner does not deposit the amount of compensation, the order of sentence passed by the courts below shall remain in force and the present petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed.

Disposed of in the above terms.