Crl. Revision No. 290 of 2006 -1- In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Revision No. 290 of 2006 (O&M) Date of Decision: April 19, 2011 Baljit Singh ---Petitioner versus State of Punjab ---Respondent Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH *** Present: Mr.D.D.Bansal, Advocate, for the petitioner Ms.Gagan Mohini, Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab *** GURDEV SINGH, J. The petitioner-accused, Baljit Singh, was convicted by Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Talwandi Sabo, for the offences under Sections 324 and 326 IPC, vide judgment dated 6.12.2005 and was sentenced as under:- Under Section Sentence imposed fine 326 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 ½ years ` 3000/- In default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month 324 IPC To undergo simple imprisonment for one year ` 1000/- In default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month Crl. Revision No. 290 of 2006 -2- He preferred an appeal against that conviction and sentence, which was decided by Additional Sessions Judge (Ad hoc) Fast Track Court, Bathinda, vide judgment dated 21.1.2006. The conviction of the accused was maintained but the sentence of imprisonment of 2 ½ years imposed upon him under Section 326 IPC was reduced to two years. Now, he has preferred the present revision against that conviction and sentence. Prosecution story, in brief, is that Nachhattar Singh, complainant, PW-3, and his brother Baljit Singh, accused, had their respective agricultural land near Rama Road, Talwandi Sabo, which was being irrigated from a common water channel. That water channel was to be used by the complainant on the evening of 19.5.2001, and as such he asked the accused to clean the same, who refused to do so and oral quarrel took place between them, in which the complainant was abused by the accused. On the same day, when at about 4.30 p.m., the complainant and his son Jaskaran Singh, injured, PW-3, reached in their land, the accused was concealing himself on the back side of the Kotha(Room). He came out with a spade and gave a blow with the same on the head of Jaskaran Singh. The second blow was given by him on the back side of his left hand. When the complainant and the injured raised alarm, the accused escaped from the spot, with the spade. The injured was removed to Civil Hospital, Bathinda, and was admitted at that place. He was medically examined by Dr. Naranjan Lal Garg, PW-1, who found two injuries on his person and those were detailed in the Medico Legal Report, Ex. PW1/A. About the admission of the injured in the hospital, the doctor sent information in writing to the police station. On the receipt of that written information, Ex. PW4/A, Atma Singh ASI, PW-4, came to the hospital and made an application , Ex. PW4/B for enquiring about the fitness of the injured to make his statement, Crl. Revision No. 290 of 2006 -3- who was declared unfit to make his statement by the doctor, vide his endorsement, Ex. PW-4/C. The ASI recorded the statement of the complainant, Ex. PW2/A, about this occurrence. After making his endorsement, Ex. PW4/D, upon the same, he sent that to the police station and on the basis thereof, formal FIR, Ex. PW4/E, was recorded against the accused. The doctor produced the sealed parcel containing the blood stained wearing apparels of the injured before the ASI and the same was taken into possession vide Memo Ex. PW4/6. The ASI went to the place of occurrence and after inspecting the same, prepared the rough site place, Ex. PW4/H with correct marginal notes. The injuries on the person of the injured were subjected to radiological examination. Hair line fracture was found in the skull. On the basis of the X- ray report, Ex. PW1/C, Dr. Niranjan Lal Garg, PW-1, declared injury No. 2 on the person of the injured as grievous. The accused was arrested on 1.6.2001. He was interrogated by ASI on 3.6.2001, upon which he made a disclosure statement that he had kept concealed one spade in his standing green fodder crop, about which only he had the knowledge and could get the same recovered from that place. In pursuance of that disclosure statement, Ex. PW4/B, the accused got recovered the spade, Ex. P.2, from the said place, which was taken into possession, vide memo Ex. PW4/C, after the rough sketch, Ex. PW4/D, thereof, was prepared. The ASI also prepared the rough site plan, PW4/K, of the place of recovery and on coming back to the police station, deposited the case property with the MHC. After the completion of the investigation, the challan was put in before SDJM, who found sufficient grounds for presuming that the accused committed offences under Sections 324 and 326 IPC. He was charged accordingly, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. To prove the guilt of the accused, prosecution examined Dr. Niranjan Lal Garg, PW-1, Nachhattar Singh, PW-2, Jaskaran Singh, PW-3. Crl. Revision No. 290 of 2006 -4- Atma Singh ASI, PW-4 and Charanjit Singh, Constable, PW-5. After the evidence was closed by the prosecution, the accused was examined by the trial court and his statement was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C.. The incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution evidence were put to him in order to enable him to explain the same. He denied all those circumstances and pleaded his false implication. He was called upon to enter on his defence. He examined Lal Singh, DW-1, in his defence evidence. I have heard learned counsel for both the sides. Learned counsel for the petitioner-accused did not challenge the conviction recorded by the trial court and upheld by the appellate court. He submitted that the accused is a young person of 30 years and is not a previous convict. He is related to the injured as his nephew and after the present occurrence, he never committed any crime. He has been standing his protracted trial from the last about 10 years. He prayed that the accused be released on probation after setting aside the sentence of imprisonment, so imposed upon him. It is a fact that the prosecution neither alleged nor proved any previous conviction against the accused. However, the benefit of probation cannot be granted to him as he was also convicted for the offence under Section 326 IPC, which is punishable with imprisonment for life. It is not his case that he was below 21 years of age on the date of the commission of the offence. However, keeping in view that he is standing his protracted trial from the last 10 years, there is ground for further reduction of the sentence of imprisonment, so imposed upon him, provided he compensates the injured for the injuries suffered by him. Accordingly, the sentence of imprisonment of two years imposed upon him under Section 326 IPC, is reduced to one year and he is directed to Crl. Revision No. 290 of 2006 -5- pay ` 50,000/- as compensation to the injured for the injuries suffered by him. That compensation shall be paid/deposited in the trial court within three months of the passing of this order, failing which this revision shall be deemed to have been dismissed. This order be certified to the trial court for taking appropriate action. Records of the trial court be returned forthwith. (GURDEV SINGH) JUDGE April 19, 2011 PARAMJIT Whether to be referred to the Reporter? No