Criminal Revision No. 1156 of 2002 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No. 1156 of 2002 Date of Decision: 30.03.2010 Sukhwinder Singh …Petitioner Versus Gram Panchayat of Mirpur, Police Station Sirhind, Tehsil and District Fatehgarh Sahib and Another …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: None for the petitioners. Mr. J.S. Bhullar, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) The present revision petition has been preferred by Sukhwinder Singh, whereas his co-accused Satwant Singh has since died during the pendency of appeal. The Gram Panchayat of village Mirpur through its Sarpanch had instituted a complaint under Section 13-A of the Punjab Village Common Land (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “1961 Act”) against the present petitioner and his co-accused Satwant Singh, on the ground that they were in an unauthorized possession of the agricultural land of the Panchayat comprised in various khasra numbers. They had refused to handover the possession thereof to the Panchayat and had spurned the various efforts of the Panchayat to recover the possession. Criminal Revision No. 1156 of 2002 2 The prosecution has examined Harvinder Singh, Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Mirpur, as PW.1, who deposed regarding this fact. In the instant complaint, the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Fatehgarh Sahib, vide its judgment dated 3.5.2000, held the petitioner guilty of an offence under Section 13-A of the 1961 Act and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.200/-. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months. The appeal preferred by the petitioner, against the judgment and order dated 3.5.2000, was dismissed by the Court of Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, vide its judgment dated 27.5.2002, and he was taken into custody on the same day. He was ordered to be released on bail by this Court on 16.8.2002. Thus, he has undergone about three months out of their actual sentence of one year. The complaint was instituted in the year 1993. This Court is of the view that the offence committed by the petitioner was not such that he should be sent behind the bars after 17 years of the filing of complaint. Under these circumstances, the sentence awarded to the petitioners is reduced to already undergone. With the observations made above, the present revision petition is disposed of. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge March 30, 2010 “DK”