Criminal Revision No.827 of 1997 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** Criminal Revision No.827 of 1997 Date of Decision:15.07.2009 Sukhdev Singh and others .....Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL Present:- Mr. N.S. Boparai, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. T.S. Salana, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. **** JUDGMENT HARBANS LAL, J. This revision is directed against judgment dated 4.7.1997 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur, whereby he dismissed the appeal of the accused Sukhdev Singh, Ajaib Singh, Gurbachan Singh, Raghbir Singh and Pritam Singh by reducing the sentence with the following observations; “In view of the above discussion, I am of the opinion that the trial Magistrate has rightly found the accused guilty and has rightly convicted them, but sentence awarded to Raghbir Singh accused u/s 326 IPC appears to be excessive. The same is, therefore, reduced to one year rigorous imprisonment. Similarly sentence awarded to Raghbir Singh u/s 325/149 IPC is also excessive, because the remaining accused have been sentenced to six months u/s 325/149 IPC, therefore, the Criminal Revision No.827 of 1997 -2- sentence of Raghbir Singh u/s 325/149 IPC is also reduced to six months. The sentence awarded to Ajaib Singh is also excessive u/s 325 IPC and the same is reduced to one year instead of 1-1/2 years u/s 325 IPC. The sentences of the remaining accused and the above accused under the remaining offences are maintained. The above-mentioned accused were convicted and sentenced by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sangrur as under:- Name of the Accused Offence u/s Period of Sentence Raghbir Singh 326 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 1 month. 325/149 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for 1-1/2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.300/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 15 days. 323/149 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 7 days. 148 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for one year. Ajaib Singh 325 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for one and half years and to pay a fine of Rs.400/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for one month. 326/149 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for fifteen days. 323/149 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for seven days. 148 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for one year. Criminal Revision No.827 of 1997 -3- Name of the Accused Offence u/s Period of Sentence Sukhdev Singh 323 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for seven days. 326/149 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for fifteen days. 325/149 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.150/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 10 days. 148 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for one year. Gurbachan Singh 326/149 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 15 days. 325/149 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.150/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for ten days. 323/149 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for seven days. 148 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for one year. Pritam Singh 326/149 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 15 days. 325/149 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.150/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for ten days. 323/149 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.100 and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for seven days. 148 IPC Sentenced to undergo RI for one year. Shortly, put the facts of the prosecution case are that on 1.1.1987 at 5:15 P.M., Gurdev Singh along with Gurmail Singh and Mohinder Singh was going to his house after performing his duty as Criminal Revision No.827 of 1997 -4- Secretary, Cooperative Agricultural Society of Village Gehlan. When they neared the house of Gurbachan Singh accused, meanwhile, the accused Gurbachan Singh armed with Kulhari, Raghbir Singh armed with gandasi, Sukhdev Singh, Pritam Singh and Ajaib Singh armed with dang each came out from the house of Gurbachan Singh, who raised lalkara exhorting his co-accused that Gurdev Singh be taught a lesson for opposing them in election of society. Gurdev Singh denied this fact. Raghbir Singh accused gave gandasi blow from its sharp edged side on the left leg of Gurdev Singh. Gurbachan Singh dealt kulhari blow from its blunt side on his right knee. Pritam Singh delivered dang blow on his left knee. Gurdev Singh fell down on the ground. When he lay fallen on the ground, Ajaib Singh gave dang blow on the back of his left shoulder, while Sukhdev Singh delivered dang blow on the back of right shoulder. Gurdev Singh, Gurmail Singh and Mohinder Singh raised alarm. The accused decamped from the spot with their respective weapons. The injured was taken to Primary Health Centre, Bhawanigarh, where he was medico legally examined. On the basis of the statement of Gurdev Singh, the case was registered. The accused were arrested. After observing due formalities and completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was laid in the Court for trial of the accused. The accused were charged under Sections 326/325/323/148 read with Section 149 of IPC to which they did not plead guilty and claimed trial. On close of the prosecution evidence, when examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C, all the accused denied the incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence against them and pleaded false implication. After hearing the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the Criminal Revision No.827 of 1997 -5- State, the learned defence counsel and examining the evidence on record, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused as noticed at the outset. Feeling aggrieved therewith, they went up in appeal, which was dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangur. Being undaunted and dissatisfied with the judgments recorded by both the Courts below, the petitioners have preferred this revision. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, besides perusing the record with due care and circumspection. Realising that he would not be able to persuade the Court to take a view contrary to the findings recorded by both the Courts below, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that he does not wish to assail the conviction recorded by both the Courts below in any manner. On scrutinising and analysing the evidence on record, with due care and caution, it transpires that no holes can be picked in the findings recorded by the aforesaid Courts. Sequelly, the conviction is upheld. Learned counsel for the petitioners has made a misericordious submission that the sentence of the petitioners may be reduced to the already undergone. As per the custody certificates, all the petitioners, namely, Sukhdev Singh, Pritam Singh, Raghbir Singh, Ajaib Singh and Gurbachan Singh, have undergone one day of the actual sentence. On their individual custody certificates, a note has been recorded in the terms that “the above said convict was released on 4.7.1997 on granting one year government remission dated 13.2.1997.” The learned Additional Sessions Judge in his judgment dated 4.7.1997 has observed as under:- “In view of the above discussion, I am of the opinion that the Criminal Revision No.827 of 1997 -6- trial Magistrate has rightly found the accused guilty and has rightly convicted them, but sentence awarded to Raghbir Singh accused u/S 326 IPC appears to be excessive. The same is, therefore, reduced to one year rigorous imprisonment. Similarly sentence awarded to Raghbir Singh u/S 325/149 IPC is also excessive, because the remaining accused have been sentenced to six months u/S 325/149 IPC. Therefore, the sentence of Raghbir Singh u/S 325/149 IPC is also reduced to six months. The sentence awarded to Ajaib Singh is also excessive u/S 325 IPC and the same is reduced to one year instead of 1-1/2 years u/S 325 IPC. The sentences of the remaining accused and the above accused under the remaining offences are maintained.” It is thus abundantly clear that the sentence inflicted upon Raghbir Singh as well Ajaib Singh has been reduced to one year. As per the afore-referred custody certificates, all the petitioners including Raghbir Singh and Ajaib Singh by way of grant of one year's remission have served out their total sentence. Sequelly, this revision petition having become infructuous, is dismissed. July 15, 2009 ( HARBANS LAL ) renu JUDGE Whether to be referred to the Reporter? Yes/No