Punjab-Haryana High Court
Krishan Lal vs State Of Punjab on 19 July, 2011
Author: Jora Singh
Bench: Jora Singh
CRA-S-409-SB of 2010 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRA-S-409-SB of 2010 (O&M)
Date of decision: 19.07.2011
Krishan Lal
........ Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab
........ Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JORA SINGH
PRESENT: Mr. P.S. Khurana, Advocate, for the appellant.
Mr. Jaspreet Singh, AAG, Punjab.
JORA SINGH, J.
Kirshan Lal, preferred this appeal to challenge the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 1.2.2010, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, in Sessions Case No. 18 dated 24.10.2008, arising out of FIR No. 74 dated 30.5.2008, registered under Section 328 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Sirhind.
By the said judgment, he was convicted under Section 328 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years and to pay a fine of ` 5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year.
Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 30.5.2008, SI Ram Kumar, along with other police officials was present at G.T. Road, CRA-S-409-SB of 2010 (O&M) -2- Sirhind. Gurpreet Singh-complainant met the police party and reported that he is doing the work of bus body builder workshop at National Coach Workshop, GT Road, Tarkhan Majra and after meeting his relatives at Khanna, he had boarded a bus for Sirhind from bus stand. One Hindu gentleman was also sitting on the third/fourth seat on the left side of the bus near back door. He sat with that person because the adjoining seat was vacant. After sometime, that person started talking with him and when they reached near the Floating Restaurant after crossing Mandi Gobindgarh then the said person starting eating biscuits wrapped in polythene envelop. One biscuit was also offered to him and after eating the same, after some time he felt dizziness and trembling. When the bus reached near the bus stand Sirhind then after alighting from the bus felt vertigo, then doubted that the said person sitting by his side gave biscuit mixed with intoxicant with an intention to steal money from him. After recording the statement of Gurpreet Singh, statement was sent to the police station on the basis of which formal FIR was recorded. Appellant was apprehended from the bus and on enquiry he disclosed his name as Krishan Lal. Biscuits in possession of the appellant were taken into police possession vide memo attested by the witnesses. Biscuits were sent to the office of the Chemical Examiner, for analysis. After receipt of report from the office of Chemical Examiner and after completion of investigation, challan was presented in Court.
Appellant was charge-sheeted under Section 328 of the Indian Penal Code, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
In order to substantiate its case, prosecution examined CRA-S-409-SB of 2010 (O&M) -3- number of witnesses, namely, PW-1 HC Kuldeep Singh, PW-2 Constable Baljinder Singh, PW-3 Dr. Parminder Singh Bhatti, PW-4 Gurpreet Singh-complainant, PW-5 HC Gurmeet Singh, PW-6 SI Ram Kumar and PW-7 Jasvir Singh Conductor.
After close of the prosecution evidence, statement of appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. Accused denied all the allegations of the prosecution and pleaded to be innocent.
Defence version of the appellant was that he was travelling in PUNBUS and was going to Delhi to receive his relative returning from foreign country. He was made to alight from the above said bus and was falsely implicated in this case.
In defence, DW-1 Ashwani Kumar, appeared and stated that appellant had boarded the bus from Jammu at 3.45 a.m. and was going to Delhi to receive his cousin. At about 11.00 a.m. he rang up to the appellant then he was informed by the appellant that he has an altercation with the police and was requested to visit Police Station Sirhind. When he came to Sirhind then enquired about the matter.
After hearing learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, learned defence counsel and from the perusal of evidence available on the file, appellant was convicted and sentenced as stated aforesaid.
I have heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned State counsel and carefully gone through the evidence available on the file.
After arguing for some time when learned defence counsel for the appellant failed to point out any infirmity or illegality in the CRA-S-409-SB of 2010 (O&M) -4- impugned judgment then stated that impugned judgment is not challenged on the point of conviction. Requested to take lenient view because appellant has already undergone more than 1½ years out of the actual sentence. Learned defence counsel for the appellant further submitted that as per prosecution story, only biscuit was supplied to the complainant. No article of the complainant was stolen. Appellant is the first offender and is in custody.
Learned State counsel argued that appellant was convicted and sentenced under Section 328 IPC. No objection if lenient view is taken because no article of the complainant was stolen.
No doubt, learned defence counsel for the appellant has not challenged the impugned judgment on the point of conviction and only requested to take lenient view, but even then I want to scrutinize the evidence as to whether prosecution story is genuine one or not?
Complainant appeared as PW-4 and stated that on 30.5.2008, he had boarded a bus from Khanna to visit Sirhind. Appellant was also in the same bus on the third/fourth seat on the rear side. He sat by the side of the appellant because the seat was vacant, then appellant started talking with him. When the bus reached near the Floating Restaurant then appellant started eating biscuits which were wrapped in a polythene envelope. One buiscuit was also offered to him and after eating the same he felt dizziness and felt trembling. When the bus reached near the bus stand Sirhind, he had alighted from the bus and felt vertigo then doubted that the said person sitting by his side gave biscuit mixed with intoxicant with an intention to steal money etc. from him. Near bus stand Sirhind police party was present and he got CRA-S-409-SB of 2010 (O&M) -5- recorded his statement. Appellant was apprehended by the police party, after his statement. Biscuits were recovered from him and the same were taken into police possession vide memo attested by the witnesses. He was brought to Civil Hospital, Fatehgarh Sahib where he was examined by the doctor.
PW-3 Dr. Parminder Singh Bhatti, stated that on 30.5.2008, Gurpreet Singh, was produced before him. He had taken blood and urine samples of Gurpreet Singh. Samples of blood and urine were sealed and the same were sent to the laboratory.
PW-5 HC Gurmeet Singh and PW-6 SI Ram Kumar, stated that they were present near bus stand Sirhind. Police party was holding Nakabandi. Gurpreet Singh-complainant after alighting from this bus came then his statement was recorded. After making endorsement, statement of Gupreet Singh-complainant was sent to the police station on the basis of which formal FIR was recorded. In view of the statement of complainant, appellant was got alighted from the bus. Appellant had a polythene bag in his hands and on search of the bag biscuits were recovered and the same were made into a sealed parcel. Parcel was taken into police possession vide memo attested by the witnesses. Complainant was produced before the doctor for medico- legal examination. Doctor had taken the samples of blood and urine of the complainant.
PW-7 Jasvir Singh, Conductor, stated that on 30.5.2008, he was the conductor of a private bus. They had started from Ludhiana at about 11.00 a.m. Ticket MO/1 was issued by him. This ticket was recovered from the appellant along with ` 250/- on personal search of CRA-S-409-SB of 2010 (O&M) -6- the appellant.
Report of the laboratory, is to the effect that blood and urine sample of the complainant after examination was found to be containing Diazepam. Sealed parcels of the biscuits recovered from the appellant were sent to the office of Chemical Examiner and as per report of the Chemical Examiner, Ex. PF, the same were found containing Diazepam. As per reports of the laboratory and Chemical Examiner, biscuit offered by the appellant to the complainant was found containing Diazepam. So, in view of the statements of the complainant, doctor and the Investigating Officer, coupled with the report of the laboratory and Chemical Examiner, trial Court rightly opined that appellant committed an offence punishable under Section 328 IPC.
In view of all discussed above, I am of the opinion that evidence on file was rightly scrutinized by the trial Court. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned judgment. No reason to differ. Impugned judgment on the point of conviction is upheld.
Appellant is the first offender and he was 42 years old at the time of occurrence. He is the resident of Jammu. Out of 4 years of actual sentence, he has already undergone more than 1½ years. Custody certificate on the file shows that appellant has already undergone 1 year 6 months and 4 days as on 29.4.2011. Appellant has two children to support and is the sole bread winner of this family. Ends of justice would be fully met if lenient view is taken otherwise appellant would become hardcore criminal if directed to undergo imprisonment as ordered by the trial Court.
Keeping in view the facts of the case and antecedents of CRA-S-409-SB of 2010 (O&M) -7- the appellant, I take lenient view and direct the appellant to undergo imprisonment already undergone (1½ years). Fine maintained.
For the reasons recorded above, appeal without merits is dismissed, with modification on the point of sentence.
Appellant is in custody. Release warrant be issued forthwith for the release of the appellant if, not required in any other case.
July 19, 2011 ( JORA SINGH ) rishu JUDGE