Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Nahar Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 12 October, 2023
Bench: M.M. Sundresh, Prashant Kumar Mishra
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Criminal Appeal No.1418 of 2011
NAHAR SINGH & ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondent(s)
O R D E R
1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the respondent. By this Court’s order dated 05.04.2021, the names of the Appellant Nos.2, 7 and 8 were deleted, having died during the pendency of the proceedings.
2. The Appellants were convicted by the Trial Court for offences punishable under Sections 326, 323, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”). The sum and substance of the case of the prosecution is that there was prior enmity between two groups belonging to the de facto complainant and the Appellants.
3. The dispute emanated over a wall, which was said to have been demolished by the persons belonging to the de-facto complainant’s group. When the complainant and the other injured persons were crossing the house of the appellants, the occurrence happened.
4. As against the first Appellant, the Special Leave Petition was Signature Not Verified dismissed and, therefore, we are concerned with the appeals filed Digitally signed by Neetu Khajuria Date: 2023.10.19 17:10:05 IST Reason: by the others.
1
5. After going through the records along with the impugned judgment, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned conviction rendered and, therefore, the only question for consideration is on sentence.
6. We find that the appellants are rustic villagers. Apart from being illiterate, many of the appellants are ladies and all of them belonging to the same family. The occurrence took place in a spur of the moment and it also happened way back in the year 2000 and, thereafter much water has flown under the bridge.
7. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances governing, we are of the view that the sentence imposed by the High Court under the impugned order requires to be modified to the one undergone already.
8. Accordingly, the appeals stand allowed in part by upholding the conviction but modifying the sentence to the one undergone already.
9. The Criminal Appeal is partly allowed in the above terms.
10. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
......................J. (M.M. SUNDRESH) ......................J. (PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA) New Delhi;
12th October, 2023.
2
ITEM NO.101 COURT NO.15 SECTION II-B
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Criminal Appeal No(s).1418/2011
NAHAR SINGH & ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF PUNJAB Respondent(s)
Date : 12-10-2023 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA For Appellant(s) Ms. Naomi Chandra, Adv.
Ms. Shweta Kapoor, Adv.
Ms. Kheyali Singh, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Shadan Farasat, A.A.G. Ms. Natasha Maheshwari, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Pal, AOR Mr. Mayank Dahiya, Adv.
Ms. Sugandh Rathor, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In terms of the signed order, the Criminal Appeal is partly allowed.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(RAVI ARORA) (RENU BALA GAMBHIR) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)
(signed order is placed on the file) 3