In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Criminal Misc. No.41727 of 2008
in Criminal Appeal No.1029-DB of 2007
Date of decision: 03.12.2008
Pawan Kumar and another ......Applicants-Appellants
Versus
State of Haryana .......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SARON
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: Mr.Vinod Ghai, Advocate
for the applicant- Sushil Kumar (appellant No.2).
Mr.Kartar Singh, A.A.G.Haryana
***
Affidavit of Shri Sanjay Singh, Deputy Superintendent Jail
Narnaul, filed in Court today, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
By way of Criminal Misc. application, the applicant-Sushil
Kumar (appellant No.2), seeks suspension of sentence of
imprisonment during the pendency of the appeal.
In the incident that occurred on 31.7.2006, Karambir
(PW-2) and Kuldeep (deceased) were returning home after they had
participated in a race and on reaching near the shop of one Vijay
they came across accused Pawan Kumar (non applicant-appellant
No.1) and Sushil Kumar (applicant-appellant No.2). Both these accused
asked Kuldeep (deceased) and Karambir (PW-2) not to pass through
Criminal Misc. No.41727 of 2008 -2-
in Criminal Appeal No.1029-DB of 2007
that street. They also abused them. When Karambir (PW-2) and
Kuldeep (deceased) protested, Pawan (non-applicant/appellant
No.1) gave a ‘Kassi’ blow to Kuldeep (deceased) on his head while
Sushil Kumar (applicant-appellant No.2) held him in his grip. The
role attributed to the applicant-Sushil (appellant No.2) is that he held
Kuldeep (deceased) in his grip while Pawan (non-applicant/appellant
No.1) gave a blow with his ‘Kassi’ on his head. Kuldeep died during
his admission in the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences,
Rohtak. The death was due to head injury.
In terms of the custody certificate that has been filed in
Court today, the applicant Sushil Kumar (appellant No.2) has
undergone two years, three months and two days of actual
imprisonment as on 1.12.2008. This includes a period of about one
year after his conviction. According to learned counsel for the State
the period of imprisonment is of a short duration and, therefore, the
applicant-Sushil Kumar (appellant No.2) is not entitled to the
concession of suspension of his sentence of imprisonment.
After giving our thoughtful consideration to the matter, it
may be noticed that the case was of a sudden fight when Pawan
Kumar (non-applicant/appellant No.1) and the applicant Sushil
Kumar (appellant No.2) had asked Karambir (PW-2) and Kuldeep
(deceased) not to pass through the street and Pawan Kumar (non-
applicant/appellant No.1) is said to have caused a single blow with
‘Kassi’ on the head of Kuldeep (deceased) while the applicant Sushil
Kumar (appellant No.2) held him in his grip. Therefore, keeping
Criminal Misc. No.41727 of 2008 -3-
in Criminal Appeal No.1029-DB of 2007
in view the role attributed and the period of imprisonment
undergone by the applicant Sushil Kumar (appellant No.2), it would
be just and expedient to suspend his sentence of imprisonment .
Accordingly, the Criminal Misc. application is allowed and
the sentence of imprisonment of the applicant Sushil Kumar
(appellant No.2) during the pendency of appeal shall remain
suspended subject to his furnishing personal bond and surety to the
satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Narnaul.
(S.S.SARON)
JUDGE
(SABINA)
JUDGE
December 03, 2008
anita