Criminal Revision No.1336 of 2004 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No.1336 of 2004 Date of Decision: 1.5.2009 Devender Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Mor, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, for the State. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) Devender Singh son of Sukh Pal, resident of village Punsika, Tehsil and District Rewari, was tried by the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rewari, in case FIR No. 232 dated 4.10.1999 registered at Police Station Sadar, Rewari, under Section 457 IPC. The trial Court found petitioner guilty of offence under Section 457 IPC and awarded sentence of one year and fine of Rs.1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, petitioner was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. Aggrieved against his conviction and sentence, petitioner had filed an appeal. The appeal was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari. Criminal Revision No.1336 of 2004 2 Facts of the present case have been noticed by the Appellate Court in para 2 of its judgment and for convenience same are reproduced below:- “That on 3.10.1999, at about 10.00 P.M. appellant Devender Singh s/o Sh. Sukh Pal, Caste Ahir is alleged to have committed house trespass of complainant Bhagwan Singh in the night after scaling the wall; that he is alleged to have entered into the room where his son Zile Singh along with his wife Poonam were sleeping, that after entering the room, he is alleged to have tried to pull the ear ring (kundal) from the ear of Poonam, who woke up and make hue and cry. As soon as accused Devender Singh tried to run away, but he was captured by Zile Singh; that on cry being raised, many villagers also gathered there at the spot including Sarpanch, Panch and Up-Sarpanch etc.; that on the suggestion of Sarpanch and the villages gathered there, Devender was handed over to his brother Ram Mehar, who had assured to produce him before the Panchayat which was convened in the morning at about 9.00 A.M. But, when he was not produced before Panchayat, so, this occurrence was reported to the police by complainant Bhagwan Singh, vide application Ex.PW1/A produced by him on 4.10.1999 before Surender Singh, HC in Police Criminal Revision No.1336 of 2004 3 Station Sadar, Rewari. It is on the basis of the same, the present FIR Ex.PW1/B was reduced into writing. Formal investigation was started. Site plan Ex. PW1/C was prepared. Statement etc. of PWs recorded. Then, accused was arrested and on completion of formal investigation, he was challaned accordingly for having committed an offence punishable under Section 457 IPC and challan was presented in the Court of learned Illaqa Magistrate, who supplied the copy of challan free of costs to him. Then, accused was charge sheeted accordingly for having committed an offence punishable under Section 457 IPC vide order dated 1.5.2000. Accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed trial”. I have perused the judgment of two Courts below. Complainant Bhagwan Singh had appeared as PW.2, his son's wife Poonam as PW.3 and his son Zile Singh as PW.4. Two Courts below have placed implicit reliance upon their testimony. The Courts below had not accepted the contention of counsel for the petitioner that there was delay in lodging of the FIR. Courts below observed that if there was any delay in lodging of the FIR, same stood explained. Two Courts below had also negated the contention that, since all the three witnesses from the same family are interested witnesses and no independent witness has been examined, therefore, prosecution case is bound to fail. Petitioner was taken into custody on 10.6.2004 and was Criminal Revision No.1336 of 2004 4 ordered to be released on bail by this Court on 30.9.2004. Petitioner has undergone two months & 20 days of his actual sentence. Occurrence in the present case pertain to year 1999. Petitioner has already suffered protracted trial of about ten days. Taking these facts into consideration as mitigating circumstance, sentence awarded upon the petitioner is reduced to already undergone. With these modifications in the sentence, the present petition is disposed off. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge May 1, 2009 “DK”