Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 2212 (PNJ)

Ajit Singh v. State Of Haryana

2007-12-19

RANJIT SINGH

body2007
Judgment Ranjit Singh, J. 1. This order will dispose of Criminal Appeal No. 1815-SB of 2002 titled Ajit Singh and another v. State of Haryana and Criminal Appeal No. 1357-SB of 2003 titled Bardeen @ Bar Ahmed v. State of Haryana. 2. Narender son of Sita Ram, Ajit son of Shiv Lal and Bhardeen @ Bhar Ahmed @ Joginder have impugned their respective conviction under Sections 392 and 397 read-with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code by filing above noted appeals. All the three appellants have been identically punished with seven years rigorous imprisonment coupled with fine of Rs. 500/- each. They are to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months each in default of payment of fine. 3. The prosecution story is that one Amit Arya made a statement before the police on 29.7.2001 to the effect that he along-with his brother Rohit Arya had gone to Rajgarh for their personal work. They had gone in a car bearing No. HR-31B-5656 (Indica). They commenced their return journey at about 1:30 PM. Enroute they came across one Esteem car No. RJ-13-6185 (Esteem) proceeding towards Rajgarh. This car crossed the car driven by the complainant. When the complainant reached near college of Siwani, they were made to stop their car by the occupants of above noted Esteem car. Two young men armed with country- made pistol came out of the Esteem car. One armed person remained seated inside the car. They asked the complainant to surrender their belongings. Rohit Arya took currency notes amounting to Rs.150/- from his pocket and gave to the said persons. While leaving, they took the Indica car belonging to the complainant and sped away towards Rajgarh. On a complaint made by complainant, FIR No. 127 was registered on 29.7.2001 under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. The complainant gave description of the accused persons besides stating that they would be in a position to identify them. 4. The appellants Ajit, Joginder and Narender were arrested in another FIR No. 291 dated 1.8.2001 registered against them under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. The Esteem car was got recovered during the course of investigation. Appellant Narender was interrogated and report in this regard is Ex.PQ. Investigation lead to recovery of Indica car of the complainant and recovery memo is Ex. PR. The Esteem car was got recovered during the course of investigation. Appellant Narender was interrogated and report in this regard is Ex.PQ. Investigation lead to recovery of Indica car of the complainant and recovery memo is Ex. PR. Recovery of country-made pistol in FIR No. 292 dated 1.8.2001, invited offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act against the appellants. Appellants Ajit, Narender and Joginder @ Bhardeen made a disclosure statement revealing commission of robbery of the Indica car on 29.7.2001 which as stated above was also recovered. Upon completion of investigation, the challan was presented under Sections 392 and 397 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against all the appellants. They stand convicted for the said offences and are sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment of seven years which is the minimum sentence that is awardable under Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants at the outset would point out that the appellants are in custody since 1.8.2001. During the course of trial and till date, the appellants have not been released on bail. Their sentence has also not been suspended after conviction though the present appeals are pending since 2002/2003. Plea is that the appellants, by now, have undergone imprisonment for six years and four months approximately. The counsel would submit that the appellants have undergone the complete rigors of the sentence awarded. They must have earned some remission during this long incarceration. According to the counsel, the appellants may probably have undergone the complete sentence of seven years imprisonment. Prayer is that the sentence awarded to the appellants be reduced to the period already undergone. The counsel would say that at this stage, it will really be futile to make submission on merits of this case. 6. Though seven years rigorous imprisonment is the minimum sentence prescribed under Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code yet the prayer of the appellant would require consideration. Seven years is the minimum sentence which is awardable upon conviction under Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellants have undergone a period of six years and four months approximately. They appear to have almost undergone the complete effect of the sentence. They are stated to be of young age living in their twenties. They must have reformed by now. A chance can be given to the appellants to further reform themselves. The appellants have undergone a period of six years and four months approximately. They appear to have almost undergone the complete effect of the sentence. They are stated to be of young age living in their twenties. They must have reformed by now. A chance can be given to the appellants to further reform themselves. They can be released to the society to lead their normal life specially so when they have undergone almost complete sentence awarded to them. Accordingly, while dismissing the appeals, sentence awarded to the appellants shall stand reduced to the period already undergone. The appellants be released from custody on receipt of the copy of this order.