IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.1712 of 2004 Date of Decision : September 22, 2010 Vicky Singh @ Vicky and another ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Ms. Vandana Malhotra, Advocate. Mr. P.S. Sidhu, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. T.P.S. MANN, J. The petitioners, alongwith Surjit Kaur @ Sito and Gurnam Singh @ Mirza were tried for offences under Sections 452/326/324/379 read with Section 34 IPC on the allegations that on 10.8.2001, all of them, in furtherance of their common intention, committed criminal trespass into the house of complainant-Sukhwinder Singh and voluntarily inflicted grievous and simple injuries, besides committing theft of the vegetables from the fields of the complainant. Vide judgment and order dated 19.8.2003, learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sultanpur Lodhi acquitted them of the charge under Section 379 IPC. All of them were convicted under Section 452 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each. Gurnam Singh @ Mirza was convicted under Section 326 IPC whereas the petitioners and Surjit Kaur @ Sito were Criminal Revision No.1712 of 2004 -2- convicted under Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each. The petitioners and Gurnam Singh @ Mirza were also convicted under Section 324 IPC whereas Surjit Kaur @ Sito under Section 324 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each. In default of payment of fine, the defaulting accused was required to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved of their conviction and sentences, only the petitioners filed an appeal but the same was dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge while exercising the powers of Sessions Judge, Kapurthala on 22.5.2004. Hence, the present revision by them before this Court. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that Ghola Singh-petitioner has already served out his entire sentence of imprisonment and, therefore, the revision filed on his behalf has become infructuous. It has further been submitted that Vicky Singh @ Vicky petitioner has already undergone an actual period of 1 year 1 month and 11 days in jail, besides earning jail remision of 1 month and 25 days and government remission of one year and, thus, the total period, including remission in his case comes to 2 years 3 months and 6 Criminal Revision No.1712 of 2004 -3- days. The occurrence in question had taken place on 10.8.2001. The injuries attributed to him were declared simple in nature for which he has been substantively held liable for the offence under Section 324 IPC whereas the grievous injury was attributed to Gurnam Singh @ Mirza accused. Therefore, his substantive sentence of imprisonment be reduced to that already undergone by him. Learned State counsel has submitted that Vicky Singh @ Vicky petitioner had wielded the kirpan in causing injuries to complainant-Sukhwinder Singh and, therefore, he does not deserve any leniency in the matter of sentence. However, he has placed on record the custody certificate as per which Vicky Singh @ Vicky petitioner has served a total period of 2 years 3 months 6 days which included jail and government remission of 1 year 1 month and 25 days earned by him, whereas Ghola Singh- petitioner was released from the jail on 22.9.2004 after giving him the benefit of jail and government remission and depositing the fine in the trial Court. Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, the Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by sending Vicky Singh @ Vicky petitioner behind the bars, once again, for undergoing his remaining sentence of imprisonment. Ends of justice would be amply met if his substantive sentence of imprisonment is reduced to that already undergone by him. Criminal Revision No.1712 of 2004 -4- Resultantly, the revision filed by Ghola Singh-petitioner is disposed of as having become infructuous. The conviction of Vicky Singh @ Vicky petitioner for the offences under Sections 452, 326 read with Section 34 and Section 324 IPC is maintained. However, his substantive sentences of imprisonment are reduced to that already undergone by him. The sentences of fine, alongwith their default clauses, are maintained. The revision filed by Vicky Singh @ Vicky is, accordingly, disposed of. (T.P.S.MANN) Setember 22, 2010 JUDGE satish