Criminal Revision No. 1505 of 2001 -1- ... IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 1505 of 2001 Date of Decision : 26.2.2008 Sukhchain Singh ... Petitioner Versus Joginder Singh and another ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND. Present : None for the petitioner. Mrs. Baljeet Mann, Advocate with Mr. Vinod Ghai, Advocate, for the respondents. S.D. Anand, J. Respondents-accused Joginder Singh, and Khushwant Singh, were tried for offences under Section 302 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Respondent Khushwant Singh was able to earn a verdict of acquittal; while Joginder Singh came to be convicted. As the State has not preferred an appeal against the finding of acquittal, the complainant has filed the present revision to obtain the invalidation of the finding of acquittal qua Khushwant Singh and to obtain enhancement of the sentence awarded to Joginder Singh. The learned Trial Court, in support of the finding of acquittal of accused Khushwant Singh, recorded justified reasons. It noticed that the presence of respondent-accused Khushwant Singh at the spot was doubtful because he could not be expected to have come to the spot empty handed when he was alleged to have accompanied his father to settle score with the deceased. The prosecution witnesses only attributed a fist blow to the said respondent-accused which he was alleged to have given on the rear of head of PW 2 Sukhchain Singh. However, Sukhchain Singh was not medico-legally Criminal Revision No. 1505 of 2001 -2- ... examined. There is, thus, no evidence on the file to prove that he did receive that injury. Apart therefrom, only a Lalkara was attributed to Khushwant Singh respondent-accused. We do not find any fault with the line of reasoning adopted by the learned Trial Judge in exonerating the respondent-accused from the charge aforementioned. We say so after having carefully examined the material obtaining on the file and in the light of the parameters laid down by the Apex Court in Ramesh Babulal v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1996 SC 2035, Jaswant Singh v. State of Haryana, AIR 2000 SC 1833 and Main Pal v. State of Haryana, AIR 2004 SC 2158. The plea for the enhancement of the sentence awarded to Joginder Singh also deserves to be rejected. The learned Trial Judge awarded life imprisonment to Joginder Singh – respondent which is the minimum punishment provided for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Insofar as the offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act, the convicted respondent was sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment. We find that the sentences awarded to the convicted respondent Joginder Singh are adequate and do not call for interference. The plea for enhancement of the sentence shall stand declined. Dismissed. ( S. D. ANAND ) JUDGE February 26,2008. ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ) JUDGE sn