HAR BHAGWAN Vs. STATE OF UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision has been pressed only in regard to the quantum of sentence of the petitioner.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is an aged person i.e. more than 65 years of age; already lost his job and cannot be re-employed on account of the conviction awarded against the petitioner.

(3.) I find that the petitioner has undergone approximately three months and twenty three days of actual sentence. The petitioner has been convicted for commission of offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of 500/-. Further the petitioner has been convicted for commission of offence under Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of 500/-. Both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner has been directed to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days. Fine has already been deposited.