SALINDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT criminal revision has been preferred by the petitioner against judgment dated 11.12.2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Karnal, whereby an appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed and judgment of conviction dated 7.5.2010 and order of sentence dated 10.5.2010 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal, sentencing the petitioner to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for commission of offence under Section 354 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.500.00, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month; rigorous imprisonment for two years for commission of offence under Section 452 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.1000.00, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month; rigorous imprisonment for two years for commission of offence under Section 325 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.2000.00, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months; rigorous imprisonment for one year for the commission of offence under Section 506 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.500.00, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month, has been affirmed. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) I need not dilate upon the facts of this case in detail as the same have already been recapitulated in the judgment of the learned Courts below and in view of the ultimate prayer of the petitioner seeking reduction in sentence.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner states that he is not pressing this revision on merit and is not challenging the conviction on merit. He is only aggrieved against the sentence part. However, he prays that the sentence of the petitioner be suitably reduced as this criminal trial is hanging on his head like damocle's sword for more than ten years and it should be a sufficient mitigating circumstance to treat him leniently. Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the complaint pertains to the year 2003 and since then a period of more than ten years has elapsed. The petitioner has suffered the ordeal for long period.