Criminal Revision No.1091 of 2011 (O&M) --1-- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.1091 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: November 17, 2011 Nirmal Singh ....PETITIONER VERSUS State of Punjab ....RESPONDENT ***** CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. K.L. Chaudhari, Advocate, for Mr. Vikram Chaudhari, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Rajni Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for respondent-State. Mr. Surinder Garg, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ***** AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This revision petition challenges judgment of conviction recorded by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot vide judgment dated 04.12.2009 and order of sentence passed on the same day. The petitioner has been convicted for commission of offence under Sections 452, 323, 352, 354, 506 IPC. The sentence is one year rigorous imprisonment and payment of fine. The petitioner carried an appeal that has been dismissed vide other impugned judgment dated 03.05.2011, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Criminal Revision No.1091 of 2011 (O&M) --2-- Faridkot. 2. As per judgment of Chief Judicial Magistrate, the petitioner was sentenced as under:- Offence Rigorous Imprisonment Fine In default 452 IPC One year Rs.1000/- One month R.I. 323 IPC Six months Rs.500/- Seven days R.I. 352 IPC -- Rs.500/- Seven days R.I. 354 IPC Eight Months Rs.1000/- One month R.I. 506 IPC One year Rs.1000/- One month R.I. 3. Allegation against the petitioner is that on 17.03.2003 at about 12 Noon, there was a fight between Pargat Singh aged about 7-8 years and Mintu s/o Dharam Pal. Mintu suffered injuries due to fall. Complainant was working inside the house. Dharam Pal moved an application in the Police Station mentioning the name of complainant's other son namely Piara Singh aged about 12-13 years who was away to appear in examination at that time. On that evening, the petitioner who was serving as Head Constable in Police, alongwith three other Police officials came to the house of complainant and enquired about Piara Singh who is complainant's son. Complainant informed the Police official that Piara Singh was away to school at that time and fight had taken place between Pargat Singh & Dharam Pal's son Mintu, however, they forcibly put Piara Singh in a car and gave beatings to him. Complainant told Head Constable, Nirmal Singh-petitioner that she would call some Panchayat Member or Sarpanch. Petitioner- accused, however, started abusing the complainant-prosecutrix in the name of her caste and gave warning that he had set right 20 ladies of similar nature of complainant's caste. The complainant was Criminal Revision No.1091 of 2011 (O&M) --3-- dragged, given fist and leg blows on account of which complainant received injuries on her body. Piara Singh ran away due to fear. Complainant was dragged into the car. In the meantime Jang Singh Member Panchayat also came there who tried to stop the petitioner but petitioner used bad words for him also. The petitioner took the complainant to the Police Station without any lady constable and gave beatings to her on the way and also abused her. The complainant was threatened with registration of a case against her and that she would be given patta blow after removing her clothes. After being brought to the Police Station, complainant was taken in a room and her modesty was outraged and she was given beatings. In the evening at about 7:00 P.M., Panchayat of village consisting of Pala Singh Bhaloor, Mander Singh, Bohar Singh alongwith some other Panchayat members came to the Police Station and requested for release of the complainant. The accused released the complainant with a warning that if she made any complaint then he would implicate her in a case. Next day feeling pain in body, the complainant got admitted in the Medical College, Faridkot where she was medically examined. Police visited the hospital where she told them about harassment at the hands of the petitioner. The Police promised to take action but no action was taken. The complainant made complaints to the higher authorities and also visited Police Station many times. When no action was taken, present complaint was filed. 4. So as to prove its case, the prosecution examined four witnesses namely, complainant who stepped into the witness Criminal Revision No.1091 of 2011 (O&M) --4-- box as PW6, Dr. Sarabjit Singh Sandher as PW1, Jang Singh as PW2 and Bohar Singh as PW3, Mander Singh as PW4 & Beant Singh as PW5 and closed its evidence. 5. In defence, the petitioner examined Jagmail Singh as DW1, Karam Singh as DW2 & Shinderpal-Steno as DW3 & closed the evidence. 6. The trial Court having discussed the evidence thread-bare recorded conviction. The reasons for recording conviction are based on relevant material and do not call for any interference in revisional jurisdiction. 7. The legal issue raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is to the effect that sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. has not been taken. 8. Considering the nature of actions of the petitioner, in considered opinion of this Court, the said actions cannot possibly be related to acts-done or purported to be done in discharge of official duties. The action of the petitioner in taking away the complainant without lady constable to the Police Station; confining her there; giving beatings and outraging her modesty cannot by any stretch of imagination be said to be related to performance/ discharge of official duty as a Head constable, in the Police Force. 9. No ground is made out for interference in revisional jurisdiction. 10. Revision petition is dismissed. 11. I find the sentence of the petitioner to be commensurate Criminal Revision No.1091 of 2011 (O&M) --5-- with the offence, therefore, no interference in regard to the reduction in sentence is called for. (AJAI LAMBA) JUDGE November 17, 2011 sonika