IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Crl.Revision No. 862 of 2008 Date of Decision: January 14, 2009 Jaswant Singh and others ...........Petitioners Versus State of Haryana ..........Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mrs.Justice Sabina Present: Mr.G.S.Sidhu Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Sidharath Sarup,AAG Haryana Sabina, J. Petitioners were convicted and sentenced by the Chief Judicial Mgistraate, Sirsa vide judgment and order dated 18.2.2006 and 20.2.2006, respectively, for an offence under Section 377 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short `IPC'). Aggrieved by the same, petitioners preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Sirsa, vide judgment dated 8.4.2008. Hence, the present revision petition. Prosecution story, in brief, as noticed by the appellate Court, in para 2 of its judgment, is as under:- “In brief, the case of the prosecution is that on 12.9.1997 PW Roshan @ Rosha son of Geja Singh came to the police station alongwith his mother Mohinder Kaur and uncle Janta Singh and got his statement recorded. He stated that he is resident of village Sukhchain. On that day at about 10.00 p.m. he was playing near Harijan Dharamshala along wih other children, then the appellants Crl.Revision No. 862 of 2008 -2- named above took him to the field of Narma crop belonging to Hazura Singh and committed carnal inter-course with him against the order of nature one by one. He tried to raise noise but all the appellants have threatened him with dire-consequences. After committing un-natural offence with him, all the appellants managed to run away from the spot. Roshan had come to his house and narrated the entire incident to his mother and uncle. Thereafter, his mother and uncle had gone to the house of appellant Bira and protested against the act of the appellants to his parents but instead of listening them, the parents of the appellant started quarreling with them. Thereafter, they have to go to the police station and got the FIR registered against the appellants. Thereafter, the investigation was taken up by the police. The police got him medicolegally examined. Site-plan was prepared. The appellants were arrested and they also got medicolegally examined and after completion of investigation, they were challaned.” During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners has challenged only the sentence part of the judgment. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioners were of young age at the time of commission of the alleged offence. Now, the petitioners as well as the complainant were married and having children and, as such, it would be in the interest of justice, if the sentence of imprisonment was reduced to already undergone by the petitioners. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, has submitted that the offence committed by the petitioners was serious in nature. Crl.Revision No. 862 of 2008 -3- After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that there is force in the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Petitioners were young at the time of the commission of the offence. The said fact is evident from the age given by the petitioners when they were examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. As per the custody certificate available on record dated 22.5.2008, petitioner- Jaswant Singh had undergone 8 months and 28 days of actual sentence, whereas, the petitioner-Bira had undergone actual sentence of 2 months and 1 day and petitioners-Boota Singh and Bagga Singh had undergone 2 months and 21 days of actual sentence upto 21.5.2008. Vide order dated 27.5.2008, the sentence of imprisonment was suspended by this Court subject to their furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirsa. Keeping in view the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the conviction of the petitioners under Section 377 read with Section 34 IPC is maintained. However, their sentence of imprisonment is reduced to as already undergone by them. With this modification, the present revision petition stands disposed of. ( Sabina ) Judge January 14, 2009 arya