Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 1140 (PNJ)

Ram Lal Alias Ramiu v. State Of Punjab

2002-10-25

HEMANT GUPTA

body2002
Judgment Hemant Gupta, J. 1. The challenge in the present petition is to the orders passed by the two courts below convicting the petitioners for an offence under Sections 325, 323 read with section 149 Indian Penal Code and sentencing to undergo imprisonment for a period of 3 years each and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for 6 months each under Section 325 Indian Penal Code and to undergo R.I. for 6 months each under Section 323 Indian Penal Code. The sentences were ordered to run consecutively. 2. The petitioners were convicted on the allegations that on 3.11.1993, Hardial Singh ASI while he posted at City Abohar, he received Medico Legal Report of Bant Singh PW 1. It was stated that he has received injuries. he sought the opinion of the doctor whether Bant Singh was fit to make statement. P.W. 5 Dr. R.K. Arora, opined that he was fit for making statement and consequently statement was recorded Ex. PA on the basis of which the prosecution case was set in motion. 3. As per the statement of Banta Singh last night at about 12.30 a.m. his youngest son Jasbir Singh came on a truck, who had a dispute with Ramu, Pappu, Parkash sons of unknown and again said sons of Badri Parshad and with the son of Parkasha. It was mentioned that the accused picked up a quarrel with him and then accused Taria lifted him and threw on the ground. Then Ramu, his son Pappu, Parkashia and his son used criminal force against him and caused injuries on his person. On account of the fail, he received injuries on the left side of pelvis, left elbow and on his forehead. 4. On completion of investigation, the police put up a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. The prosecution produced various witnesses including injured P.W. 1 Banta Singh. 5. On appreciation of evidence the trial Court convicted the petitioners for an offence under Sections 325, 323 and 149 Indian Penal Code and sentenced them for various sentences as mentioned above. 6. The trial Court passed such order of sentence considering the fact that the injuries were caused on a person of old man of 80 years. 7. The Appellate Court maintained the findings recorded by the trial Court and dismissed the appeal. 6. The trial Court passed such order of sentence considering the fact that the injuries were caused on a person of old man of 80 years. 7. The Appellate Court maintained the findings recorded by the trial Court and dismissed the appeal. In the present revision, the argument of the petitioners is that the allegations of the prosecution are absolutely vague and the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. Both the courts below have appreciated the evidence in detail and returned concurrent finding regarding the complicity of the petitioners in the commission of an offence under Sections 325 and 323 Indian Penal Code. I do not find any illegality or irregularly, while passing the impugned orders by the courts below convicting the petitioners. 8. However, the fact remains that the incident is of the year 1993. It will be in the interest of justice if the petitioners are released on probation as they are first offenders and are of young age. 9. Keeping in view the age of the petitioners and that fact that they are not a previous convict, I feel that the ends of justice would be met if the petitioners are extended the benefit of probation and is ordered to be released on probation. In view of this, while maintaining conviction, the sentence awarded to the petitioners is set aside and instead they are directed to be released on probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act on their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount each for a period of one year undertaking to appear and receive sentence as and when called upon by the court, in case of default of any term and condition of the probation bond and to keep peace and be of good behaviour during the said period of one year from the date of his entering into such bond. The bonds be furnished to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate Ferozepur, within four weeks. With the above modification in the matter of sentence, the revision petition is dismissed.