Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jaspal Singh @ Pali vs State Of Punjab on 30 September, 2014
Author: Sabina
Bench: Sabina
Criminal Revision No.1633 of 2014 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH
Date of Decision: September 30,2014
Criminal Revision No.1633 of 2014 (O&M)
Jaspal Singh @ Pali ...........Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ..........Respondent
Criminal Revision No.2196 of 2014 (O&M)
Charanjit Kumar ...........Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ..........Respondent
Criminal Revision No.2898 of 2014 (O&M)
Satnam Singh @ Shama ...........Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ..........Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina
Present: Mr.Vikasdeep,Advocate and
Mr.Piyush Sharma,Advocate
for the petitioner(s).
Mr.Deep Singh,Assistant Advocate
General,Punjab
**
RAJ KUMARI BHALLA
2014.10.06 16:01
I attest to the accuracy and
authencity of this document
High Court
Criminal Revision No.1633 of 2014 (O&M) 2
Sabina, J.
Vide this judgment, the above-mentioned three petitions would be disposed of as they have arisen out of same FIR.
Petitioners and their co-accused had faced trial in FIR No. 23 dated 20.3.2007 for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (`IPC' for short). The trial Court vide judgment/order dated 18.3.2011 convicted and sentenced all the petitioners and their co-accused-Boota Singh and Raju qua commission of offence punishable under Section 392 IPC. So far as accused Dalbir Singh is concerned, he was acquitted of the charge framed against him. Petitioners as well as accused Raju and Boota Singh preferred an appeal against the judgment/order of their conviction and sentence as ordered by the trial Court. The appellate Court vide judgment dated 3.4.2014 allowed the appeal qua appellant-Raju. So far as appellant- Satnam Singh @ Shama is concerned, his conviction was altered from Section 392 IPC to Section 382 IPC and he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for the period of two years and fine as imposed by the trial Court was maintained. So far as appellants- Boota Singh, Charanjit Kumar and Jaspal Singh @ Pali are concerned, their conviction was altered from Section 392 IPC to Section 414 IPC. They were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each and fine as imposed by the trial Court was maintained. Hence, the present petition by petitioners-Jaspal Singh @ Pali, Charanjit Kumar and Satnam Singh @ Shama.
RAJ KUMARI BHALLA
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well 2014.10.06 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this document High Court Criminal Revision No.1633 of 2014 (O&M) 3 as learned State counsel and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.
Prosecution story in brief was that on 20.3.2007 at about 8.30 p.m., Complainant -Jagjit Singh, after closing his shop, was going to his village Sherpur Sadha on his motorcylce bearing No. PB41A4866 along with Surinder Singh. When they reached near the water tank of village Bhago Araian, three persons came on two motorcycles with muffled faces. The said persons snatched `16,700/- from the pocket of the complainant and also snatched three mobile phones from the complainant ( received by the complainant for repair purposes). The said persons also snatched `3290/- from Surinder Singh. They also took away motorcycle of the complainant and went towards Sultanpur Lodhi side. Complainant further stated that the said persons were in the age group of 20 to 25 years. In the meantime, handkerchief had fallen from the face of one of them and he could identify the said person, if produced before him.
After completion of investigation and necessary formalities, challan was presented against the accused.
Complainant appeared in the witness box as PW1 and deposed as per the prosecution case. He further deposed that on 24.5.2007, he was present at Bus stand Tashpur along with police party. Three persons came on motorcycle bearing No. PB-41A4866 The said persons were apprehended. He (complainant) identified the motorcycle belonging to him. Persons, who were apprehended with the motorcycle, were accused - Boota Singh, Charanjit Kumar @ Sabi and Jaspal Singh @ Pali. Motorcycle in question was taken in RAJ KUMARI BHALLA 2014.10.06 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this document High Court Criminal Revision No.1633 of 2014 (O&M) 4 possession. Accused were arrested. He further deposed that on 26.5.2007, he was present in the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sultanpur Lodhi, where he identified accused-Satnam Singh @ Shama.
Thus, in the present case, so far as petitioners- Charanjit Kumar @ Sabi and Jaspal Singh @ Pali are concerned, they were apprehended while they were driving the stolen motorcycle belonging to the complainant. In these circumstances, learned Appellate Court has rightly ordered the conviction and sentence of the said petitioners under Section 414 IPC.
So far as petitioner-Satnam Singh @ Shama is concerned, he was duly identified by the complainant as the complainant had seen him at the time of occurence. In these circumstances, learned Appellate Court rightly held that the petitioner-Satnam Singh @ Shama was guilty of offence under Section 382 IPC.
No ground for interference is made out.
Accordingly, all the above-mentioned three petitions are dismissed.
(SABINA) JUDGE September 30,2014 arya RAJ KUMARI BHALLA 2014.10.06 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this document High Court