In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Crl.Revision No. 1071 of 2001
Date of Decision:February 18, 2009
Sham Lal and others
---Petitioners
versus
State of U.T. Chandigarh
---Respondent
Coram: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
***
Present: Mr. J.P.Sharma, Advocate for
Mr. Mohan Jain, Senior Advocate and
Mr.S.K.Chopra ,Advocate,
for the petitioner No. 1
Mr. N.K.Sanghi, Advocate,
for petitioner No. 2.
None for the respondent.
***
SABINA, J.
Petitioners were convicted for an offence under Section 147,
435 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal code (hereinafter referred to
as ‘IPC’) vide judgment dated 21.4.1998 by Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Chandigarh. Vide order dated 22.4.1998, petitioners were sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 500/- each
under Section 147 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for
two years and fine of Rs. 500/- each under Section 435 read with Section
149 IPC. Aggrieved by the same, petitioners preferred an appeal and the
same was dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh
vide judgment dated 17.7.2001. Hence, the present revision petition.
Crl.Revision No. 1071 of 2001 -2-
Prosecution story, in brief, as noticed by the learned Appellate
Court in paras 2 of its judgment, is as under:-
“The facts of the case are encapsulated like this. Station
house Officer of Police station, Central, Chandigarh
presented the challan against the appellants (accused in
the trial court) for the ofrfences under Sections 147, 427,
435 read with Section 149 of the IPC. The facts of the
case of the prosecution are that on 21.9.1990, ASI Sat Pal
accompanied by other police officials was present at the
market of Sector 18-C, Chandigarh on account of
deployment on agitation duty. A wireless message was
received by him that the students numbering 250 to 300
were setting the vehicles on fire which were parked in the
boundary of Hydel Bhawan in Sector 18-B, Chandigarh.
ASI Sat Pal along with other police officials rushed to the
above referred place and found that mob of 250 to 300
students were setting the vehicles on fire and thereby
damaging them, which were parked in the said building.
The agitationists took to their heels on seeing ASI Sat Pal
and other police officials there at. ASI Sat Pal recorded
numbers of some of the vehicles, which were affected by
this arson indulged in by the students. ASI Sat Pal
summoned the fire Brigade to extinguish the fire. At that
time, he received a wireless message that some students
who were agitating against the reservation policy set on
Crl.Revision No. 1071 of 2001 -3-fire some vehicles parked in Kothi No. 1308, Sector 18-D
Chandigarh. The agitationists set on fire other vehicles.
ASI Sat Pal dispatched ruqa to the police station and
himself went to the respective affected places, where the
agisationists had set the vehicles on fire and damaged
them. He took into police possession burnt and damaged
vehicles vide recovery memos and also prepared the
rough site plans thereof. He took into police possession
the vehicles, which were set on fire by the agitationists at
Hydel Bhawan, Sector 18-B Chandigarh. A wireless
message was again received by him that one Tractor had
been set on fire by the agitationists in Sector-21,
Chandigarh. ASI Sat Pal, thereafter, reached at Sector
-21 and found that mob consisting of 150 to 200 agitators
had set a Tractor on fire. They tried to run away on
seeing them and the above ASI managed to apprehend 10
agitators out of them. He took into police possession
Tractor No. CHW 5862, which was set on fire, vide
separate memo. He prepared the rough site plan thereof
and recorded the statements of the witnesses under
Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. The entire vehicles put on fire
by the agitationists were taken into police possession vide
separate memos by ASI Sat Pal. On completion of the
investigation of the case, the challan was presented
against the accused in the trial court.”
Crl.Revision No. 1071 of 2001 -4-
Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that
petitioners were not previous convicts. The incident in this case relates to
the year 1990 and the petitioners were facing criminal proceedings since
then. Some of the persons who were also part of the mob, had been
sentenced to pay fine only. Learned counsel for the petitioners has not
challenged the conviction of the petitioners as ordered by the courts below
but has submitted that the petitioners be released on probation.
The object of releasing the accused on probation is that he
should be given an opportunity to reform himself. The benefit of probation
can be denied only to hardened criminals or where restrictions have been
imposed by Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. Offences
under Sections 435 and 147 IPC are bailable.
In the present case occurrence had taken place on 21.9.1990 at
about 2-00 p.m. Petitioners are facing criminal proceedings since then.
Petitioners were convicted for an offence under sections 147, 435 read with
Section 149 IPC, Petitioners are not previous convicts and have got
families to support. Accordingly, conviction of the petitioners, as ordered
by the courts below, is maintained. However, the sentence awarded to the
petitioners by the courts below is set aside. Instead of sentencing the
petitioners to imprisonment they be released on probation for one year
subject to their furnishing bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety
in the like amount within two months from today to the satisfaction of the
trial/Duty Magistrate. Petitioners shall further undertake to appear and
receive sentence as and when they are called upon during the period of
probation and in the meantime, they should keep peace and be of good
Crl.Revision No. 1071 of 2001 -5-
behavior. The fine imposed on the petitioner be treated as costs of
proceedings.
The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(SABINA)
JUDGE
February 18, 2009
PARAMJIT