Crl. Rev. No. 1951 of 2004 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Rev. No. 1951 of 2004 Date of decision : May 20, 2009 Jagjit Singh and others Petitioners Versus State of Punjab Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL Present: Mr. Ram Bilas Gupta, Amicus Curiae for the petitioners Mr. Surender Kapoor, Addl. A.G. Punjab A.N. JINDAL, J. (ORAL) Assailed in this petition is the judgment dated dated 10.9.2004 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kapurthala dismissing the appeal filed by the accused-petitioners (herein referred as 'the petitioners') against the judgment dated 28.8.2003 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Kapurthala, convicting and sentencing them as under:- U/s 323 IPC Jagjit Singh, Surjit Singh, Sukhjinder Singh, Puran Singh, Mohan Lal, Dilbagh Singh, Gurnam Singh, Mehnga Singh, Jarnail Singh To undergo RI for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/- each U/s 323/149 Jagga, Dilbagh Singh, Gurnam Singh, Mehnga Singh, Surjit Singh, Jarnail Singh, Sukhjinder Singh, Puran Singh and Mohan Lal To undergo RI for one year each on ten counts U/s 323/149 Jagjit Singh, Jagga Gurnam Singh, Mehnga Singh, Surjit Singh, Jarnail Singh, Sukhjinder Singh, Puran Singh and Mohan Lal To undergo RI for one year each Crl. Rev. No. 1951 of 2004 2 U/s 323/149 Jagjit Singh, Jagga, Dilbagh Singh, Gurnam Singh, Surjit Singh, Jarnail Singh, Sukhjinder Singh, Puran Singh and Mohan Lal To undergo RI for one year each U/s 323/149 Jagjit Singh, Jagga, Dilbagh Singh, Gurnam Singh, Mehnga Singh, Jarnail Singh, Sukhjinder Singh, Puran Singh and Mohan Lal To undergo RI for one year each U/s 323/149 Jagjit Singh, Jagga, Dilbagh Singh, Gurnam Singh, Mehnga Singh, Surjit Singh, Sukhjinder Singh, Puran Singh and Mohan Lal To undergo RI for one year each U/s 323/149 Jagjit Singh, Jagga, Dilbagh Singh, Gurnam Singh, Mehnga Singh, Jarnail Singh, Sukhjinder Singh, Puran Singh and Mohan Lal To undergo RI for one year each In brief the facts are that 3 kanals 6 marlas of land, adjoining the road and house of Jagtar Singh was in possession of the complainant, Jarnail Singh and Gurnam Singh accused/petitioners (herein referred as petitioners) wanted to take forcible possession of the land. On 2.1.2000 at about 2.30 p.m. they alongwith Jagjit Singh alias Gauri, Jagga, Dilbagh Singh, Mehnga Singh, Surjit Singh, Sukhjinder Singh, Puran Singh and Mohan Lal are petitioners came there. They were armed with deadly weapons like gandasi, Sua, Barchha and bricks at that time, Jagtar Singh complainant and his sons Charan Singh and Swaran Singh were ploughing the land by means of tractor, which they hired on payment of charges, Mohan Lal, petitioner was empty handed and he exhorted that the complainant and his sons be not allowed to got scot free. Jarnail Singh, petitioner inflicted injuries on the right arm and elbow of Jagtar Singh with sua, Sukhjinder Singh, petitioner inflicted Barchha blows on the right and left leg or Jagtar Singh. Surjit Singh, petitioner hurled brick bats towards Crl. Rev. No. 1951 of 2004 3 Swaran Singh hitting his right jaw, right arm and right knee. Jagjit Singh alias Gaur petitioner inflicted a dang blow on the leg of Charan Singh. Dilbagh Singh gave a brick blow on the left thumb of Charan Singh. At that time Surjit Singh a relative of Jagtar Singh, injured and Amrik Singh, brother in law of Swaran Singh, injured reached with some New Year customary gifts. Jagga Singh inflicted injuries with Gandasa on the person of Surjit Singh which hit his head. Gurnam Singh inflicted a dang blow hitting the right leg and hand of Surjit Singh. Hue and cry raised by them attracted Gurnam Kaur wife of Swaran Singh. When she come forward to rescue Jagtar Singh and others from the clutches of the accused. She was also given dang blown by Puran Singh. On raising of alarm Smt. Vir Kaur wife of Jagtar Singh was attracted. Thereafter, the petitioners fled from the spot with their respective weapons. On the basis of the aforesaid statement, the case was registered and investigated. The petitioners were arrested and the completion of the investigation was followed by a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. The petitioners were charged for the offences punishable under Sections 148/323 read with Section 149 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and opted to contest. The prosecution led sufficient evidence and ultimately the trial ended in conviction. Appeal preferred by them also failed. Arguments heard. Record perused. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners without assailing the judgment of conviction has submitted that they are first offenders and have already undergone three months and three days of the substantive sentence. Consequently, prayer for extending leniency on quantum of sentence was made. Having examined the impugned judgment, the evidence appears to have been appreciated in the right perspective. No illegality Crl. Rev. No. 1951 of 2004 4 much less irregularity has been detected or pointed out warranting interference by this Court. As such, the impugned judgment of conviction is maintained. Now coming to the quantum of sentence, it may be observed that the occurrence took place way back in the year 2000; the petitioners have already suffered a lot due to the protracted proceedings; the injuries suffered by the injured are simple in nature; and they have already undergone three months and three days of the substantive sentence. No bad antecedents have been brought on record in order to dub them as habitual offenders. As such, the ends of justice would be met if some leniency is extended to them. Consequently, this petition is dismissed with the modification in the sentence to that of already undergone by them without any alteration in the sentence of fine. (A.N.JINDAL) 20.05.2009 JUDGE reena