Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1735 (PNJ)

Amarjeet Singh v. State of Haryana

2012-12-04

NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

body2012
Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.— The facts in a nutshell are that the petitioner was found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 325 and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaithal, and sentenced as under:- Under Section Imprisonment Fine In default of payment of fine 323/34, IPC Six months Rs.1000/- Simple imprisonment for a period of one month . Under Section Imprisonment Fine In default of payment of fine 325/34, IPC Three years Rs.3000/- Simple imprisonment for a period of six months . 326/34, IPC Three years Rs.6000/- Simple imprisonment for a period of six months . All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. However, in appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kaithal, set aside the sentence awarded by the learned trial court under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code, whereas, the sentence awarded for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code had been affirmed. The petitioner filed the criminal revision petition before this court challenging the judgments passed by both the courts below and the same came up for hearing on 20.01.2011 when the following order was passed by this court:- “I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. The sword of Damocles is not to hangover the head of the petitioner for all times to come. He has been suffered mental agony due to registration of this criminal case against him. The petitioner has already undergone for about one year and ten months. Considering totality of the facts and circumstances of this case while maintaining the conviction of the petitioner, the petitioner is sentenced to undergo for the period already undergone by him in this case. However, fine imposed upon the petitioner is enhanced to Rs.20,000/- over and above the fine already imposed by the trial court. The petitioner is directed to deposit the above said amount, within one month from today, with the trial court to be paid to the injured as compensation under Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is made clear that in case enhanced amount is not deposited, as directed above, this revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed. With the above mentioned modification this revision stands disposed of. It is made clear that in case enhanced amount is not deposited, as directed above, this revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed. With the above mentioned modification this revision stands disposed of. ” Prayer in the present application is for modification of the order dated 20.01.2011 passed by this court to the extent that the date for depositing the amount of compensation of Rs.20,000/- be extended to 14.05.2012. Learned counsel contended that the learned trial court had imposed a total fine of Rs.10,000/- upon the petitioner and the same was deposited by him in the learned trial court before filing the appeal in the court of Session. Since the petitioner was behind the bars when the order dated 20.01.2011 was passed by this court, therefore, the mother of the petitioner thought that Rs.10,000/- more were to be deposited, therefore, she deposited Rs.10,000/- on 02.02.2011 before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kaithal and on the same day the petitioner was ordered to be released. He further submitted that after some time, the complainant moved an application before the learned trial court for taking the petitioner into custody on the premise that he (petitioner) was directed to deposit Rs.20,000/- as fine over and above the fine imposed by the learned trial court and as such the learned trial court ordered that the petitioner be taken into custody. On 14.05.2012, the petitioner-accused appeared before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaithal, and submitted that he wanted to deposit the balance amount of Rs.10,000/-, however, the said court ordered that the petitioner had failed to comply with the order dated 20.01.2011 passed by this court (High Court), therefore, the petitioner be taken into custody for undergoing the remaining sentence. Learned counsel submitted that as soon as the petitioner came to know that total Rs.20,000/- were to be deposited over and above the fine imposed by the learned trial court, the petitioner deposited Rs.10,000/- on 14.05.2012, the day on which he was taken into custody, therefore, the learned counsel contends that the order dated 20.01.2011 passed by this court be modified in the interest of justice and the date for depositing the enhanced amount of fine be extended upto 14.05.2012. He further submitted that by now the petitioner had undergone approximately two years and four months. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer of the counsel for the petitioner. He further submitted that by now the petitioner had undergone approximately two years and four months. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer of the counsel for the petitioner. Heard. It is a fact that a total fine of Rs.10,000/- was imposed by the learned trial court. It is also conceded position that this court vide order dated 20.01.2011 had disposed of the criminal revision petition by passing an order that the petitioner would deposit Rs.20,000/- over and above imposed by the court below. It is also conceded position that at the time when this court had passed the order, the applicant-petitioner was undergoing the sentence and as such he was behind the bars. It is also averred by the applicant-petitioner that his mother is an illiterate lady and she presumed that a total sum of Rs.20,000/- was imposed as fine and as Rs.10,000/- were deposited at the time of conviction and sentence of the petitioner before the learned trial court, therefore, the sum of remaining Rs.10,000/- was to be deposited and as a consequence thereof Rs. 10,000/- were deposited on 02.02.2011 and, thereafter, the petitioner was ordered to be released from the jail. On 14.05.2012, the applicant-petitioner came to know that a total sum of Rs.20,000/- over and above the fine imposed by the learned trial court was to be deposited, therefore, he deposited the remaining Rs.10,000/- on the same day i. e. 14.05.2012 before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaithal, but he was taken into custody to serve out the remaining sentence because he had failed to comply with the order dated 20.01.2011 passed by this court. The stand taken by the applicant-petitioner appears to be genuine. It is a fit case in which this court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction to part justice to the applicant-petitioner, therefore, the order dated 20.1.2011 passed by this court is modified to a very limited extent and accordingly, the last para of the said order shall be read as under:- “Considering totality of the facts and circumstances of this case while maintaining the conviction of the petitioner, the petitioner is sentenced to undergo imprisonment for the period already undergone by him in this case. However, the fine imposed upon the petitioner is enhanced to Rs.20,000/- over and above the fine already imposed by the trial court. However, the fine imposed upon the petitioner is enhanced to Rs.20,000/- over and above the fine already imposed by the trial court. The petitioner is directed to deposit the above said amount up to 14.05.2012 with the trial court for being paid to the injured as compensation under Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is made clear that in case the enhanced amount is not deposited, as directed above, this revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed. ” With the above modification in the order dated 20.01.2011, the present application is disposed of.