Punjab-Haryana High Court
Arun Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 8 November, 2016
Author: Inderjit Singh
Bench: Inderjit Singh
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
......
Criminal Revision No.2109 of 2015
.....
Date of decision:8.11.2016
Arun Kumar
...Petitioner
v.
State of Haryana and others
...Respondents
....
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh
.....
Present: Mr. Ferry Sofat, Advocate for Mr. Rajesh Lamba, Advocate for
the petitioner.
.....
Inderjit Singh, J.
This criminal revision petition has been filed under Section 401 Cr.P.C. challenging the impugned judgment dated 21.3.2015 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Palwal, whereby the appeal filed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.5.2014 and 28.5.2014 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hodal, convicting the petitioners for the offences under Sections 323, 325 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 323 IPC read with Section 34 IPC each and further sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 325 IPC read with Section 34 IPC each and further sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 506 IPC read with Section 34 IPC each, has been dismissed. However, the sentence of the 1 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 19-11-2016 14:37:50 ::: Cr. Revision No.2109 of 2015 [2] petitioners has been modified and they have been ordered to be released on probation of good conduct on their entering into bonds in the sum of `50,000/- each with one surety in the like amount each for a period of two years and to appear and receive sentence as and when called by the Court during such period and to keep peace and be of good behaviour during the said period. The present petitioner, who is complainant in the case, has filed this criminal revision petition for setting aside the order vide which benefit of probation and grant of compensation to the tune of `20,000/- has been given.
The brief facts as noted down in the impugned judgment dated 27.5.2014 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hodal, are as under:-
"The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 5.1.2007, complainant Arun Kumar has got recorded his statement to the effect that he is practicing with his father in the private clinic. On 26.12.2006 at about 5.45 p.m., a fight took place with his brother Varun Kumar while playing cricket in High School with Rakesh son of Bijender Singh and Shish Pal son of Nem Singh. After the fight, when his brother Varun Kumar was coming in the rasta in front of the temple then Rakesh and Ravi son of Bijender and Kailash son of Jeeta surrounded him. On hearing the noise of the fight, he reached there. Thereupon Nem Singh, Shishpal, Rohtash taking Saria and Lathis in their hands came there. Nem Singh has given a Saria blow on the Takna of his 2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 19-11-2016 14:37:51 ::: Cr. Revision No.2109 of 2015 [3] right foot and Shishpal has given a Panch blow on his mouth which caused injury on his below the lip and teeth Rohtash has given a Lathi blow on his back. Thereupon, his brother ran away after rescuing from them. Thereupon, he cried Mar Diya Mar Diya then Hari son of Tej Singh and Surender Singh son of Balbir Singh rescued him from the accused persons otherwise they would beat him more. At the time of going accused persons were saying that today he has been escaped and in future they would cause is death. His family members took him to Palwal for treatment from where he was referred to B.K. Hospital Faridabad. On this information, a case was registered. Investigation was conducted. Accused persons were arrested. Statements of witnesses were recorded. After completion of all necessary investigation, a challan was prepared and presented in the Court for trial."
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the evidence, the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hodal, vide the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27/28.5.2014 convicted and sentenced the accused as mentioned above. Aggrieved against the above judgment the accused preferred an appeal before the Sessions Court, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Palwal, vide impugned judgment dated 21.3.2015 upheld the conviction of the accused but modified the sentence and they were released on probation.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present 3 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 19-11-2016 14:37:51 ::: Cr. Revision No.2109 of 2015 [4] case, nature of the offences and in view of the fact that there is allegation that only Nem Singh had given a `Saria' blow on the `Takna' of his right foot which is a grievous injury and Shishpal had given a Panch blow on his mouth which caused injury on his below lip and teeth. Rohtash had given a lathi blow on his back which injuries are simple. All the injuries are with blunt weapon.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and in view of the fact that the accused are first offenders and they are suffering the criminal proceedings since 2008 i.e. for the last about more than eight years, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has rightly given the benefit of probation. Further the learned Additional Sessions Judge has also granted the compensation of `20,000/- payable to injured Arun Kumar. The order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Palwal is correct as per the record and as per law. No illegality has been committed by the Court below by releasing the private respondents on probation. An opportunity has been given to reform them. Therefore, no interference is required in the the order of sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Palwal, and the same is upheld.
Finding no merit in the criminal revision petition, the same is dismissed.
November 8, 2016. (Inderjit Singh)
Judge
*hsp*
NOTE: Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether reportable: No
4 of 4
::: Downloaded on - 19-11-2016 14:37:51 :::