Amrik Singh vs State Of Haryana on 20 January, 2014

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Amrik Singh vs State Of Haryana on 20 January, 2014

Bench: T.P.S.Mann

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                AT CHANDIGARH

                                         CRR 3002 of 2013(O&M)
                               Date of Decision : January 20, 2014


Amrik Singh

                                                       .....Petitioner

                              VERSUS

State of Haryana

                                                    .....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S.MANN

Present :   Mr. Ravinder Malik, Advocate

            Mr. Rudraneel Bhardwaj, Asstt. A.G., Haryana

T.P.S. MANN, J. (Oral)

The trial Court convicted the petitioner under Section 323 IPC and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. He was further convicted under Section 325 IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-. He was also convicted under Section 452 IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two years with fine of Rs. 300/-. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner was ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved of his conviction and sentence, the petitioner filed an appeal which was dismissed by the lower appellate Court. Still not satisfied, the petitioner filed the present revision which came CRR 3002 of 2013(O&M) -2- up for preliminary hearing on 28.10.2013 when after hearing counsel for the petitioner, notice was issued regarding quantum of sentence only.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a first offender. According to the prosecution, the petitioner was holding a danda which he wielded in causing an injury on the left leg of injured-Gagandeep Singh. The petitioner on the one hand and complainant Sonia, mother of injured Gagandeep Singh belong to the same village. Subsequent to the registration of the aforementioned FIR, no skirmish has taken place between the parties. The petitioner has been facing the agony of criminal prosecution for the last more than four years. He has already deposited the fine imposed upon him by the trial Court. Out of the sentence of two years imposed upon him, the petitioner has already undergone an actual period of more than four months. Therefore, the petitioner deserves the concession of probation. In any case the sentence awarded to him is on the higher side and, therefore, the same be reduced.

Learned State counsel has opposed the stand of the petitioner by submitting that injured-Gagandeep Singh was a young child of the age of about 8 years at the time of occurrence and was a student of second standard. The injury caused by the petitioner on his left leg resulted in a fracture of his left tibia.

CRR 3002 of 2013(O&M) -3- Therefore, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of probation. As regards the sentence of imprisonment already undergone by the petitioner, he has produced the custody certificate as per which the petitioner has undergone an actual period of four months and twenty four days. He is also not shown to be involved in any other case.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case especially the fact that injured-Gagandeep Singh was aged about 8 years at the time of the occurrence and was a student of second standard and the injury received by him at the hands of the petitioner had resulted in fracture of left tibia, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of probation. However, the sentence of imprisonment awarded is highly excessive. While reducing the same, this Court can direct the petitioner to pay an enhanced amount of fine so that the same may be paid to the mother of injured-Gagandeep Singh, as compensation.

Resultantly, the conviction of the petitioner, as ordered by the trial Court is upheld, his sentence of imprisonment on all the counts is reduced to that already undergone by him. However, the fine of Rs.200/- imposed upon the petitioner under Section 325 IPC is enhanced by Rs. 25,000/- and in default CRR 3002 of 2013(O&M) -4- thereof the petitioner shall undergo simple imprisonment for one year. The enhanced amount of fine, when deposited by the petitioner, be released in favour of Smt. Sonia, mother of injured- Gagandeep Singh, as compensation.

The revision is, accordingly, disposed of.





                                                                        ( T.P.S. MANN )
                         January 20, 2014                                     JUDGE
                         ajay-1




Kumar-I Ajay
2014.01.22 14:22
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Punjab-Haryana High Court