High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Gian Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab on 4 March, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gian Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab on 4 March, 2009
Criminal Revision No. 549 of 1997                                  1




     In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh.


                  Criminal Revision No. 549 of 1997

                     Date of Decision: 4.3.2009


Gian Singh and Others
                                                          ...Petitioners
                               Versus
State of Punjab
                                                        ...Respondent


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.


Present: Mr. Bipan Ghai, Senior Advocate
         with Mr. Sandeep Gehlawat, Advocate
         for the petitioners.

         Mr. Mehardeep Singh, Assistant Advocate
         General, Punjab, for the State.

         Mr. S.S. Narula, Advocate
         for the complainant.


Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral)

Gian Singh, Karnail Singh, Rajinder Singh and Ajaib Singh

were tried in case FIR No. 28 dated 27.2.1988 registered at Police

Station Sahnewal, under Sections 326, 325, 324, 323 & 148 IPC.

Briefly stated that on 26.2.1988 at about 7.30 P.M. Gurmail

Singh and his brother Pritam Singh were returning to their house from

the fields. They had gone to bring fodder. When they reached near the

house of Mela Ram son of Milkhi Ram, there Mela Ram met them. At

that time, Karnail Singh accused raised an alarm that complainant be

taught a lesson for obstructing the street. The accused were armed with
Criminal Revision No. 549 of 1997 2

weapons and caused injuries to Gurmail Singh, Pritam Singh and Mela

Ram.

Pritam Singh, Gurmail Singh and Mela Ram, injured were

medicolegally examined by Dr. Suresh Kumar PW.1.

Trial Court considered the evidence of Dr. K.L. Kapur DW.1

and held that even though Gian Singh accused had suffered injuries,

they are on the non-vital part of the body. Grievous injury suffered by

accused Gian Singh is on little finger, therefore, no benefit was granted

to the accused. For recording conviction, the trial Court, also took into

consideration, the fact that PW Pritam Singh, injured, had suffered an

injury on the occipital region and the injury was bone deep and underline

bone was cut.

Aggrieved against the same, the accused/petitioners had filed

an appeal. The Appellate Court upheld their conviction and sentence

awarded by the trail Court.

Petitioners were convicted and sentenced under Section 326

IPC to two years rigorous imprisonment.

Mr. Bipan Ghai, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Sandeep

Gehlawat, Advocate, has stated that Gurmail Singh, injured, appeared

as PW.2, Pritam Singh, injured, appeared as PW.4 and Mela Ram,

injured, appeared as PW.5, therefore, their presence at the spot is

stamped and the two Courts below have found their testimony to be

reliable. Therefore, he will not be in a position to assail their testimony.

Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in the present case,

occurrence pertains to year 1988 and the petitioners have suffered

protracted trial for 21 years. He has further submitted that in the last 21
Criminal Revision No. 549 of 1997 3

years, petitioners have committed no offence and there is a complete

peace, amity and harmony in the village. He further submitted that in

case the petitioners are sent behind bars at this stage, peace prevailing

in the village may be disturbed and may cause another incident. It has

been further submitted that petitioners have undergone about two

months of their actual sentence. It has been further canvassed before

this Court that injured-witnesses can be compensated by enhancing the

fine.

I find merit in this contention of learned counsel for the

petitiones.

Accordingly, sentence awarded upon the petitioners is

reduced to already undergone. However, sentence of fine is enhanced

to Rs.25,000/- qua each accused. The amount of fine shall be disbursed

by the trial Court to the three injured proportionately. No benefit of

reduction in sentence shall accrue to the petitioners, in case fine is not

deposited.

With the observations made above, the present petition is

disposed off.

(Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia)
Judge
March 4, 2009
“DK”