Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sat Pal And Others vs State Of Haryana on 26 September, 2013
Author: K. C. Puri
Bench: K. C. Puri
CRA NO.S-213-SB OF 2003(O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRA NO.S-213-SB OF 2003(O&M)
DECIDED ON : 26.09.2013
Sat Pal and others
...Appellant
versus
State of Haryana
...Respondent
AND
CRR NO. 1582 OF 2003(O&M)
Krishan Lal
...Petitioner
versus
The State of Haryana and others
...Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. C. PURI
Present : Mr. Ashit Malik, Advocate,
for the appellants.
Mr. Amit Kaushik, Senior DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Arjun Attri, Advocate,
for the complainant.
K. C. PURI, J. (ORAL)
Vide this common judgment, I intend to dispose of Criminal Appeal No. S-213-SB of 2003 titled as, "Sat Pal and others vs. State of Haryana" and Criminal Revision No. 1582 of 2003 titled as, "Krishan Lal vs. State of Haryana and others", as both the appeal and revision have arisen out of Bhatia Shalini 2013.10.23 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA NO.S-213-SB OF 2003(O&M) -2- the same occurrence. However, for convenience, the facts are being taken from CRA No. S-213-SB of 2003.
Briefly stated, all the appellants along with co-accused have been sent to face trial by SHO of Police Station Alewa for an offence punishable under Sections 148/307/325/323/149 of the Indian Penal Code (in short "the IPC") vide FIR No. 112 dated 17.05.1995.
The facts as gathered from the record are that on 17.05.1995 Krishan Lal (complainant) made statement to the effect that about six months prior to the occurrence, he had suspected Sat Pal as accused for theft of his buffalo. A Panchayat was convened in that regard where Sat Pal was exonerated of the above said allegation. About one month prior to the occurrence, a fight took place in between Bhan @ Chander Bhan and his son Satyawan with Dharam Singh and Sat Pal. Both the parties were challaned under Section 107/151 Cr.P.C. On 17.05.1995, the complainant was sleeping on the roof of his house. He heard some noise from the ground floor that Chander Bhan had been given beatings. He went towards the house of Jile Singh where he saw Krishan son of Chuirya, his son Hukmi, Dharam Pal, Sat Pal and Dheera @ Randhir sons of Mangat, Phuli Devi w/o Mangat Ram and five more persons who belong to other villages, one of them was armed with gun and the others were having lathies and gandasies, were giving lathi and gandasi blows to Chander Bhan, who was lying on the ground and was making noise for saving Bhatia Shalini 2013.10.23 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA NO.S-213-SB OF 2003(O&M) -3- him. When complainant reached near Chander Bhan, then accused Dharam Singh gave lathi blow which hit him on his head, Sat Pal gave lathi blow which hit on his left little finger, Hukmi gave lathi blow which hit on his left shoulder. Thereafter, Ram Niwas son of Chander Bhan, Panpori wife of Chander Bhan and Chatar Singh son of Tara Singh reached the spot. Then the accused having beard and was armed with gun, fired a shot which hit Chatar Singh on his legs. Then all the accused went away along with their respective weapons via kacha path. On the basis of his statement, FIR was recorded. The investigation was carried out, accused were arrested and after completion of the same, challan against the accused was presented in Court.
On presentation of challan, copies of same were supplied to the accused free of costs, as envisaged under Section 207 Cr.P.C. The case was committed to the Court of Session as the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC was exclusively triable by the Court of Session.
Thereafter charge under Sections 307/148/149/325 of the Indian Penal Code was framed against all the accused and charge under Section 27 of the Arms Act was also framed against accused Sudesh, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined Baljit Singh, Clerk as PW-1, Dr.G.D.Gupta as PW-2, Dr. Satish Aggarwal as PW-3, Dr. H. S. Sehgal as PW-4, Krishan Dayal as Bhatia Shalini 2013.10.23 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA NO.S-213-SB OF 2003(O&M) -4- PW-5, Vinod Kumar Kaushik as PW-6, Balbir Singh as PW-7, Constable Prahlad Singh as PW-8, Chander Bhan as PW-9, Krishan lal as PW-10, Kuldeep Gupta Draftsman as PW-11, Ram Niwas as PW-12, Dr. D.P.Kharb as PW-13, Mohinder Singh as PW-14 and closed the evidence.
Thereafter all the accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein all the incriminating evidence was put to them to which they pleaded innocence and false implication. The accused have stated that the occurrence took place in very late hours of the night when recognition of culprits was not possible. It was further pleaded that Krishan Lal, in his FIR, has stated that he could not possibly identify five of the culprits. There was no gun fire nor any gun shot injury was sustained. They have been falsely implicated because of the ill feeling of the complainant party.
The accused were called upon to lead their defence evidence. They examined Dr. A.K.Suri as DW-1 and thereafter closed the evidence.
The learned trial Court, after appraisal of the evidence, held that no offence under Section 307 and 307/149 IPC is made out against the accused. Suresh accused was acquitted under Section 27 of Arms Act also. However, the accused namely Sat Pal, Randhir @ Dheera, Dharam, Phulli Devi, Krishan and Hukmi @ Hukam Chand were found guilty for an offence punishable under Sections 323/149/148/325 IPC and sentenced them to Bhatia Shalini 2013.10.23 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA NO.S-213-SB OF 2003(O&M) -5- undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of `1500/- each for an offence punishable under Section 148 IPC and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months each; They were further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and pay fine of `1500/- each for an offence punishable under Section 325 read with Section 149 IPC and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months each; They were also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each for an offence punishable under Section 323 IPC. However, all the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Whereas accused Phuli Devi, Krishan Lal, Dharam Singh were ordered to be released on probation for keeping good behaviour for a period of two years.
Feeling dissatisfied with the judgment of conviction dated 04.01.2003 and order of sentence dated 06.01.2003 passed by Shri Dhani Ram, Additional Sessions Judge (adhoc), Karnal, all the three appellants have preferred the present appeal, whereas Krishan Lal has preferred revision petition for convicting the appellants under Sections 307 IPC.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records carefully.
CRR NO. 1582 OF 2003 Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that Bhatia Shalini 2013.10.23 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA NO.S-213-SB OF 2003(O&M) -6- the trial Court has wrongly acquitted Ram Mehar, Ved Parkash and Suresh. He has further submitted that Dharam, Phulli Devi, and Krishan have been wrongly granted the concession of probation. In view of nature of injuries, all the accused including Ram Mehar, Suresh and Ved Parkash be awarded actual sentence of imprisonment.
I have carefully considered the said submission. The learned trial Court has allowed the concession of probation to Dharam Singh, Krishan and Phuli Devi taking in to consideration their ages.
So far as Ram Mehar, Ved Parkash and Suresh are concerned, they have been acquitted after duly appreciating the evidence on file. The scope of revision is limited and this Court can interfere only if there is misreading of evidence or the trial Court has committed any illegality.
There is nothing on file that trial Court has misread or misinterpreted the evidence on file or that the judgment qua the above said accused is perverse. So, in these circumstances, the revision petition No. 1582 of 2003 stands dismissed except regarding the point of compensation which has been discussed in the later part of judgment.
CRA No. S-213-SB OF 2003 Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the occurrence relates to May, 1995 i.e more than 18 years back. The appellant Hukmi @ Hukam Chand has undergone Bhatia Shalini 2013.10.23 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA NO.S-213-SB OF 2003(O&M) -7- incarceration for a period of 03 months and 06 days, Randhir @ Dheera has undergone incarceration for a period of 02 months and 06 days and Sat Pal has undergone incarceration for a period of 03 months and 05 days. The grevious injuries are on the non- vital part. So, prayer has been made for taking lenient view regarding quantum of sentence.
I have considered the said submissions.
The occurrence is more than 18 years old. The appellants must have settled in their lives. As per the conviction slip, appellant Hukmi @ Hukam Chand has undergone incarceration for a period of 03 months and 06 days, Randhir @ Dheera has undergone incarceration for a period of 02 months and 06 days and Sat Pal has undergone incarceration for a period of 03 months and 05 days. They are not the previous convicts nor facing trial in any other case. They have not misused the concession of bail. The grevious injuries are on the non-vital part.
So, considering whole of the circumstances discussed above, the sentence of the appellants namely Sat Pal, Hukam Chand @ Hukmi and Randhir @ Dheera stand reduced to the period already undergone by them. However, each of the appellant is directed to pay a compensation of `15,000/- each within two months, failing which, they shall be called upon to undergo their remaining part of sentence. Out of the said amount of compensation, on realisation, a sum of `25,000/- shall be paid to Chatar Singh (injured), `10,000/- to Ram Niwas (injured) and Bhatia Shalini 2013.10.23 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRA NO.S-213-SB OF 2003(O&M) -8- `5000/- each to Panpori and Chander Bhan.
Both the appeal as well as revision petition stand disposed of accordingly.
A copy of this judgment be sent to the learned trial Court for strict compliance.
SEPTEMBER 26, 2013 (K. C. PURI)
shalini JUDGE]]
Bhatia Shalini
2013.10.23 15:52
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court Chandigarh