Punjab-Haryana High Court
Hari Om vs State Of Hy on 19 December, 2014
Author: T.P.S.Mann
Bench: T.P.S.Mann
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Appeal No. S-405-SB of 2002
Date of Decision : December 19, 2014
Hari Om and others .....Appellants
VERSUS
State of Haryana .....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S.MANN
Present : Mr. Jagjot Singh, Advocate for
Mr. Kunal Dawar, Advocate.
Mr. Randhir Singh, Additional A.G., Haryana.
T.P.S. MANN, J. (Oral)
Alongwith the present appeal, the Court intends to dispose of Criminal Appeal No.S-435-SB of 2002 filed by Hari Om, as both the appeals have arisen out of one and the same occurrence.
For an occurrence, which had taken place on 8.10.1995 at about 5.00 p.m. in the area of village Rampur Khor, in which Namo Narain, Ramesh, Yogender, Raju, Raj Pal and Niranjan Kumar received injuries, FIR No.262 dated 8.10.1995 came to be registered at Police Station Chhainsa under Sections 148/307/323/325/149 IPC and Sections 25 of the Arms Act at the instance of complainant Birpal. It was alleged therein that appellants Hari Om, Jaipal, Dev Raj, Jasbir and Rohtash as well as Moharpal, since deceased and Bijender, since acquitted, had participated in the occurrence and caused injuries to the aforementioned persons. The trial SATISH KUMAR 2015.01.05 13:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No. S-405-SB of 2002 -2- of the case ended with the acquittal of Bijender of all the charges against him. Appellants Hari Om, Jaipal, Dev Raj, Jaspal and Rohtash, besides Moharpal were convicted under Sections 148, 325/149 and 323/149 IPC. They were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for one year under Section 148 IPC, three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each under Sections 325/149 IPC and six months under Sections 323/149 IPC. In addition, appellant Hari Om was also convicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. In default of payment of fine, the convicts were required to undergo further imprisonment for a period of one month in lieu of slab of Rs.500/-, wherever the same occurred. 50% of the fine, upon its realisation, was ordered to be paid to injured Namo Narain and Ramesh in equal shares. Aggrieved of their conviction and sentences, Hari Om, Jaipal, Dev Raj, Jasbir and Rohtash appellants, besides Moharpal filed the present appeal, i.e. Criminal Appeal No.S-405-SB of 2002.
During investigation of the aforementioned case, Hari Om appellant was arrested on 11.10.1995. On the following day, i.e. 12.10.1995, he suffered a disclosure statement and on its basis got recovered the gun used by him in the above said case from a box lying in his house. As he SATISH KUMAR 2015.01.05 13:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No. S-405-SB of 2002 -3- did not possess any license or permit to keep the same, FIR No.268 dated 12.10.1995 under Section 25 of the Arms Act was registered at Police Station Chhainsa against him. The trial of the said FIR resulted in Hari Om being held guilty under Section 25 of the Arms act and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo imprisonment for a period of two months.
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that Moharpal appellant has since died and, thereafter, his appeal stands abated. Learned counsel has further submitted that the surviving appellants, namely, Hari Om, Jaipal, Dev Raj, Jaspal and Rohtash, do not challenge their conviction. However, he has submitted that the surviving appellants have been facing the agony of criminal prosecution for the last more than 19 years. The grievous injury received by PW Ramesh was attributed to convict Moharpal, who has since died. The surviving appellants were attributed causing of only simple injuries. Further, appellant Hari Om, who was said to have fired at the complainant party has already undergone a period of more than one year out of the sentence imposed upon him. Even the remaining surviving appellants, namely, Jaipal, Dev Raj, Jasbir and Rohtash had remained behind the bars during the trial of the case for some period of time. All the surviving appellants have been SATISH KUMAR 2015.01.05 13:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No. S-405-SB of 2002 -4- enjoying the concession of bail for the last more than 12 years as their sentences were suspended by this Court on 14.3.2002. Subsequent to suspension of their sentence of imprisonment and uptil today, none of the surviving appellants has misused the concession. Prayer has, accordingly, been made for taking a lenient view in the matter of sentence of the surviving appellants.
Learned State counsel has produced the certificate issued by the Sarpanch of village Rampur Khor to which village Moharpal appellant belonged, wherein it is mentioned that said Moharpal has since died. The said certificate is duly counter-signed by the Station House Officer, Police Station, Chhainsa. Alongwith the said certificate, photocopy of the death certificate of Moharpal has been appended. Learned State counsel has, however, opposed the prayer made on behalf of the surviving appellants for taking a lenient view in the matter of sentence as, according to him, all of them had taken active part in the commission of crime.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case, this Court finds that no useful purpose will be served by sending the appellants, namely, Hari Om, Jaipal, Dev Raj, Jasbir and Rohtash behind the bars, once again to undergo their remaining sentences of imprisonment. Ends of justice would be amply met if their SATISH KUMAR 2015.01.05 13:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No. S-405-SB of 2002 -5- substantive sentences of imprisonment are reduced to that already undergone by them.
Resultantly, the appeal filed by Moharpal appellant is dismissed as having become abetted. However, the conviction of the surviving appellants, namely Hari Om, Jaipal, Dev Raj, Jasbir and Rohtash under Sections 148, 325/149, 323/149 IPC and of Hari Om appellant under Section 27 of the Arms Act, besides Section 25 of the Arms Act are maintained. However, the sentences of imprisonment of the aforementioned surviving appellants are reduced to the one already undergone by them. At the same time, the fine of Rs.1,000/- imposed upon the surviving appellants under Sections 325/149 IPC is enhanced to Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of the same, these appellants shall undergo imprisonment for one year. The fine of Rs.1,000/- imposed upon Hari Om appellant for the offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act as well as similar amount of fine for the offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act alongwith their default clauses are maintained. The enhanced amount of fine for the offence under Sections 325/149 IPC, on recovery, be disbursed to injured Namo Narain and Ramesh in equal shares.
The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
( T.P.S. MANN )
December 19, 2014 JUDGE
SATISH KUMAR satish
2015.01.05 13:28
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh