Ajay Sharma Vs U.T. Chandigarh

High Court Of Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh 17 Sep 2013 CRR No. 2561 of 2013 (O and M) (2013) 09 P&H CK 0475
Bench: Single Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

CRR No. 2561 of 2013 (O and M)

Hon'ble Bench

Sabina, J

Advocates

Bhupinder Ghai, for the Appellant; Sukant Gupta, for the Respondent

Final Decision

Disposed Off

Acts Referred
  • Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Section 279, 304A, 337, 338

Judgement Text

Translate:

Sabina, J.@mdashPetitioner had faced trial qua commission of offence punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338, 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC" for short) in FIR No. 430 dated 6.12.2001 registered at Police Station Sector 34, Chandigarh. The trial Court, vide judgment/order dated 10.7.2010 convicted and sentenced the petitioners qua commission of offence punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338, 304-A IPC. In appeal filed by the petitioner, the Appellate Court upheld the conviction of the petitioner under Sections 279, 337, 338, 304-A IPC but reduced the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner to one year u/s 304-A IPC. Hence, the present revision petitions by the petitioner.

2. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has not challenged the conviction of the petitioner under Sections 279, 337, 338, 304-A IPC but has submitted that sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner be reduced to the period already undergone by him.

3. As per the prosecution case, four persons were travelling in the Maruti car and one of the occupants had died, whereas, the other three occupants had suffered injuries. However, none of the injured had been examined during trial. Petitioner was not a previous convict and was only bread earner of the family.

4. Accordingly, conviction of the petitioner for commission of offence punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338, 304-A IPC is maintained. However, the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner, as ordered by the Courts below, is reduced to the period already undergone by him. Petitioner, who is in custody, be set at liberty forthwith, if he is not required in any other criminal case. Fine, as imposed the trial Court is stated to have already been deposited by the petitioner. Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

From The Blog
Delhi High Court Clarifies: ‘No Coercive Measures’ Protects Only Against Arrest, Not Investigation Stay
Nov
06
2025

Court News

Delhi High Court Clarifies: ‘No Coercive Measures’ Protects Only Against Arrest, Not Investigation Stay
Read More
Supreme Court Orders Compensatory Plantation on 185 Acres in Delhi Ridge by March 2026
Nov
06
2025

Court News

Supreme Court Orders Compensatory Plantation on 185 Acres in Delhi Ridge by March 2026
Read More