Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 782 (PNJ)

Sukhwinder Singh v. State of Punjab

2007-03-30

H.S.BHALLA

body2007
JUDGMENT H.S. Bhalla, J:.-This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 28.4.1994 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Barnala, vide which he convicted the appellant under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and he was ordered to pay a fine of Rs.500/-;in default thereof, he was directed to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. However, all the accused were acquitted of the charges framed against them under Sections 302 and 304-B of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Learned counsel at the very out-set has contended that he does not challenge the conviction of the appellant on merits and confines his arguments only on the point of quantum of sentence. Learned counsel further submits that a case under Sections 302/304-B and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code was registered. Criminal Appeal N .239-SB of 1994 2 against the appellants in the year 1993.All the accused, including the appellant were acquitted of the charges framed against them under Sections 302 and 304-B of the Indian Penal Code. However, The present appellant was convicted under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code by the order of Additional Sessions Judge, Barnala on 28.4.1994.Thereafter,he preferred an appeal before this Court in the year 1994 and now a considerable period of 14 years has elapsed from the date of commission of the offence. Learned counsel further submits that during this period, the appellant has been facing a mental agony of the protracted trial and a sword of conviction has been persistently hanging over his head since then. Learned counsel prays that a lenient view be taken against the appellant since he is a cultivator/driver by profession and he has already suffered imprisonment for 13 months during the trial of the Case. Learned counsel has further submitted that keeping in view the facts and mitigating circumstances of the appellant, as also the fact that they have already undergone a period of 13 months during the trial of the Case, some leniency by way of mercy be shown in the matter of sentence against the appellant. 3. Learned counsel has further submitted that keeping in view the facts and mitigating circumstances of the appellant, as also the fact that they have already undergone a period of 13 months during the trial of the Case, some leniency by way of mercy be shown in the matter of sentence against the appellant. 3. Since the prayer made by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant has been restricted only on the quantum of sentence, therefore, I do not consider it necessary to recapitulate the facts again in the judgment herein, since they have been narrated in the judgment of the trial Court in details. 4. I have considered the submissions raised by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. It is no doubt true that on account of the pendency of the appeal for a long period, the. Criminal Appeal N .239-SB of 1994 3 appellant has been facing mental agony persistently for the last 14 years and since then a sword of conviction has been hanging over his head and in such like circumstances, in my considered view, no useful purpose would be served, except for creating disturbance now at this stage in the peaceful marital life being led by him, in case the appellant is sent to jail to serve out the remaining sentence awarded to him by the learned trial Court after a period of more than 14 years. After examining the nature of the case and the circumstances under which the offence was committed and also keeping in view the fact that the appellant has already undergone a total period of 13 months during the trial of the Case as also after his conviction, coupled with the present circumstances, as discussed above, I am of the view that the ends of justice would be met if a lenient view is taken against the appellant. Accordingly, conviction against the appellant under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code is maintained and sentence of imprisonment imposed on the appellant shall stand reduced to the period, which he has already undergone. With the aforesaid reduction in the matter of sentence, appeal is partly allowed. ——————————————