Criminal Appeal No.193-SB of 1998 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Appeal No. 193-SB of 1998 Date of Decision: January 15, 2010 Harpreet Singh ...........Appellant Versus State of Punjab ..........Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Mr.B.P.S.Dhillon, Advocate for the appellant Mr.J.S.Sandhu, Assistant Advocate General,Punjab ** Sabina, J. Appellant-Harpreet was convicted for an offence under Sections 306 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (for short `IPC') dated 12.2.1998 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar. Vide order of even date, the Additional Sessions Judge,Amritsar sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- In default of payment of fine, the appellant was further ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 306 IPC only. Hence, the present appeal. The brief facts of the case, as noticed by the Additional Sessions Judge, in paras 1 to 3 of its judgment, are as under:- “1. On 15th July, 1996 Kashmir Singh son of Suba Singh Jat of Criminal Appeal No.193-SB of 1998 2 village Janian (PW2) made statement Ex.PE before ASI Shabagh Singh (PW11) in the terms that he is resident of village Janian where he cultivates the land. He has four children of whom two are sons and two are daughters named Karamjit Kaur and Sarbjit Kaur alias Parminder Kaur (deceased) and they all are married. About two years ago, Sarbjit Kaur alias Parminder Kaur was married to Harpreet Singh alias Happy (accused). Sometime after the marriage there used to be quarrels between Parminder Kaur and her husband for the former having brought inadequate dowry. Harpreet Singh alias Happy was asking her to fetch Colour T.V. About six/seven months before the occurrence, he (Kashmir Singh) gave Black and White Television. About one month back, his son-in-law Harpreet Singh alias Happy asked his (Kashmir Singh's) daughter to bring Rs.10,000/- from her parents as he was in need of the same. He (Kashmir Singh) gave Rs.10,000/- to his daughter. Today (referring to 15.7.1996) he (Kashmir Singh) and his brother Dilbagh Singh went to meet Sarbjit Kaur alias Parminder Kaur at about 7/7.15 P.M. at village Kang and having reached her house found he lying un-conscious on a cot in the court yard when Harpreet Singh alias Happy was not in the house. She (Sarbjit Kaur alias Parminder Kaur) told him that her husband Harpreet Singh alias Happy has forcibly administered some poisonous substance to her and has gone out of the house. Thereupon, he (Kashmir Singh) and his brother Dilbagh Singh traced Harpreet Singh alias Happy from outside and having arranged conveyance removed her to Vidyala Hospital, Tarn Criminal Appeal No.193-SB of 1998 3 Taran for treatment, where she died. He (Kashmir Singh) having left his brother Dilbagh Singh near the dead body of Sarbjit Kaur alias Parminder Kaur proceeded for reporting the matter to the police. When he was on the way, he met ASI Shabegh Singh who after recording this statement made his endorsement Ex.PE/2 and sent the same to the Police Station, where at formal FIR Ex.PE/1 came into being. 2. Thereafter ASI Shabegh Singh PW11 went to the place of occurrence and prepared inquest report Ex.PF and application Ex.PA for post mortem examination of the deceased. He handed over the dead body to constable Sat Pal and PHG Partap Singh alongwith relevant papers. Then he returned to P.S. On 16.7.1996 he was present with some other police officials at Bus Stand, Tarn Taran, where constable Sat Pal and P.H.G.Partap Singh produced before him the clothes removed from the dead body i.e. salwar Ex.P2, shirt Ex.P3 and Dopatta Ex.P4 and the same were turned into parcel, sealed with his seal S.S. and taken into possession vide memo Ex.PR attested by constable Sat Pal and PHG Partap Singh. Then ASI Shabegh Singh went to the place of occurrence and prepared rough site plan Ex.PS,Charpai (cot) Ex.P5 was seized vide memo Ex.PT attested by Major Singh and HC Balbir Singh, PWs. Statements of the witnesses were recorded. On return to the Police Station, the case property was deposited with MHC Gurinder Singh. The accused was searched but he was not available. Thereafter, the investigation of the case was handed over to SI Bikramjit Singh, PW13 who on 19.7.1996 recorded Criminal Appeal No.193-SB of 1998 4 the statements of the PWs and on 21.7.1996 he along with other police officials conducted raid on the behak of Sukhwinder Singh, Sarpanch of village Kang and arrested the accused from there. On 26.7.1996 he recorded the statements of MHC Gurinder Singh and constable Sat Pal. On 11.10.1996 the Investigation of this case was handed over to ASI Tarlok Singh, PW14 who on the said date went to village Janian and took photograph of the marriage Ex.P1 and list of dowry articles mark A letter on exhibited as PJ/1 into possession vide memo Ex.PJ attested by Kashmir Singh and constable Lakha Singh. He also recorded the statements of Piara Singh, granthi (priest) and others. After completion of the investigation, the accused was challaned. 3. On commitment of the case, the accused was charged under Section 304-B IPC or in the alternative under Section 302 IPC by Shri I.S.Bajwa, the then learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar. The charge was read over and explained to the accused who pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried.” Learned counsel for the appellant, during the course of arguments, has not challenged the conviction of the appellant under Section 306 IPC but has submitted that the sentence qua imprisonment be reduced to already undergone by the appellant. Learned counsel has further submitted that the appellant is a young man and was aged about 21 years at the time of alleged occurrence,.The appellant has a young child to look after. As per the custody certificate placed on record, the appellant has undergone one year seven months and twenty nine days of actual Criminal Appeal No.193-SB of 1998 5 sentence. Accordingly, keeping in view the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, it is a fit case where the sentence qua imprisonment is liable to be reduced to already undergone by the appellant. Hence, the conviction of the appellant under Section 306 IPC is maintained. However, the sentence qua the imprisonment of the appellant is reduced to already undergone by him. Fine is stated to have already been deposited. Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. (Sabina) Judge January 15, 2010 arya