Karnail Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab on 31 January, 2014

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Karnail Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab on 31 January, 2014

Bench: T.P.S.Mann

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                AT CHANDIGARH


                                                CRR 1857 of 2013
                               Date of Decision : January 31, 2014

Karnail Singh and others

                                                     .....Petitioners
                              VERSUS
State of Punjab
                                                   .....Respondent


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

Present :   Mr. A.D.S.Sukhija, Advocate
            for the petitioners.

            Ms. Amarjit Kaur Khurana, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

            Mr. Sunil Agnihotri, Advocate
            for the complainant.

T.P.S. MANN, J.

The petitioners, alongwith Manjit Singh @ Kaka were tried for the offences under Sections 323/325/326/34 IPC. Vide judgment and order dated 22.1.2011, Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dasuya convicted and sentenced the petitioners and Manjit Singh @ Kaka as under:-

i) Karnail Singh convicted under Section 326 IPC and Ranjit Singh, Manjit Singh and Dalbir Kaur under Sections 326/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month;

CRR 1857 of 2013 -2-

ii) Ranjit Singh convicted under Section 325 IPC and Karnail Singh, Manjit Singh and Dalbir Kaur under Sections 325/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each; and

iii) Karnail Singh and Ranjit Singh were convicted under Section 323 IPC and Manjit Singh and Dalbir Kaur under Sections 323/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months each.

All the substantive sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently. The amount of fine imposed was deposited by all the four convicts.

Aggrieved of their conviction and sentences, the petitioners and Manjit Singh filed an appeal but during its pendency, Manjit Singh died on 9.4.2012 and, accordingly, the proceedings against him were abated vide order dated 28.9.2012.

After hearing counsel for the petitioners and going through the judgment of conviction and sentences passed by the trial Court, Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur vide judgment dated 19.3.2013 upheld the conviction and sentences of the petitioners and dismissed their appeal. All the petitioners were taken into custody and sent to jail for undergoing the sentences of imprisonment.

Still not satisfied, the petitioners filed the present CRR 1857 of 2013 -3- revision. The same was admitted on 30.5.2013 and notice issued on the application for suspension of sentence.

Learned counsel for the petitioners did not challenge their conviction for the various offences as ordered by the Courts below. However, he had submitted that the petitioners were behind the bars since 19.3.2013 when their appeal was dismissed by the lower appellate Court. Both the parties were residents of the same village and were neighbours. There was no serious enmity between the parties. Therefore, with the intervention of the respectables and common friends, the parties had amicably settled the matter. In line with that, the petitioners were ready and willing to pay a sum of Rs. 40,000/- to complainant Manjit Singh and his wife Manjit Kaur so as to assuage their hurt feelings. Therefore, the remaining sentences of imprisonment of the petitioners be set-aside.

Learned counsel for the complainant had confirmed the factum of compromise and stated that his clients had no objection if the remaining sentences of the petitioners are set- aside. He also accepted the amount of Rs. 40,000/- from the pairokar of the petitioners in the Court which was further handed over to complainant-Manjit Singh.

Having heard counsel for the parties and keeping in CRR 1857 of 2013 -4- mind the factum of compromise, this Court is of the considered view that as the petitioners have already undergone a period of more than ten months out of the sentence of two years imposed upon them and apart from depositing the fine imposed upon them by the trial Court, they have further paid a sum of Rs. 40,000/- to the complainant as compensation, a case is made out for setting aside their remaining sentences of imprisonment.

Resultantly, the conviction of the petitioners, as recorded by the Courts below, is upheld. Their sentences of imprisonment on all the counts are reduced to that already undergone by them. No order is required to be passed in regard to the amount of fine imposed by the trial Court as the same stands deposited by the petitioners.

The revision is, accordingly, disposed of.





                                                                       ( T.P.S. MANN )
                         January 31, 2014                                    JUDGE
                         ajay-1




Kumar-I Ajay
2014.01.31 14:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Punjab-Haryana High Court