CRA-775-SB of 1996 1
In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.
CRA-775-SB of 1996
Decided on Sept 04,2009.
Prem Singh -- Appellant
vs.
State of Haryana --Respondent.
CORAM:HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
Present: Mrs.Monika Jalota,Amicus-Curiae, for the appellant
Mr.Amit Khatkar,AAG,Haryana, for the respondent.
Rakesh Kumar Jain, J:
This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 02.11.1996
passed by learned Addl.Sessions Judge (IV), Faridabad, whereby the
appellant has been held guilty and convicted under Section 324 IPC and
against the order of sentence dated 05.11.1996, whereby he has been
sentenced to undergo two years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of
Rs.1000/-. In default of payment of fine, he was further ordered to undergo
R.I. for three months. It was further ordered that the fine, if realized, shall
be paid to injured Lalit Kumar.
Though this appeal was filed by the appellant through
Sh.Suvneet Sharma, Advocate, but on 29.4.2009, Mr.Gaurav Goel,
Advocate, appeared and sought an adjournment to file vakalatnama and to
CRA-775-SB of 1996 2
address arguments. It was pointed out by Mr. Goel, that Mr. Suvneet
Sharma, Advocate, who had filed this appeal has since been appointed as
Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Since Mr.Goel, Advocate, did not
appear on 15.5.2009, therefore, the Court appointed Mrs.Monika
Jalota,Advocate, as Amicus-Curiae to assist the Court.
Learned Amicus-Curiae has put in appearance before the
Court and submitted at the outset that she does not want to argue on the
issue of conviction, therefore, the same is hereby maintained. However,
she argued on the point of quantum of sentence and submitted that the
appellant was 19 years of age at the time of alleged offence which was
committed in the heat of passion as his younger brother was beaten by the
complainant in the School. It is further submitted that FIR was registered as
far back as in the year 1993, and since then, 16 years have passed but
through out this period, sword of conviction and criminal proceedings were
persistently hanging on the head of the appellant. It is also admitted that
out of two years’ sentence, the appellant has already suffered 7 months
during the course of trial. It is, thus, prayed that the sentence suffered by
the appellant may be reduced to the period already undergone but with some
increase in the fine.
The facts of the case need not be recapitulated as the learned
counsel for the appellant has not argued on merit. However, there is no
denial of the fact that at the time of alleged occurrence which took place in
the year 1993, the appellant was 19 years of age which is mentioned in
his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
It is an admitted fact that the appellant has already suffered 7
months of sentence out of total two years’ sentence. Now the appellant must
CRA-775-SB of 1996 3
be 35 years of age and must be a family man.
In view of the fact that 16 years have passed since the date of
alleged occurrence in which the appellant has suffered agony of protracted
trial which continued up to the year 1996 and also of the present
proceedings in which about 13 years have been spent, I feel that it would
be in the interest of justice if rest of the sentence awarded to the appellant
is ordered to have undergone by him. However, keeping in view the
injuries suffered by the injured, I am of the view that the appellant should
pay a sum of Rs.5000/- more towards compensation to injured Lalit Kumar
besides the amount of fine of Rs.1000/- already paid by him. The amount
of compensation shall be paid by the appellant within two months from the
date of receipt of the certified copy of this Court’s order. In case of non-
deposit of fine, this appeal shall stand dismissed automatically. The appeal
is thus disposed of in the manner indicated above.
Sept 04,2009 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge