Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 437 (PNJ)

Sukhwinder Singh v. State of Punjab and Another

2014-02-26

KULDIP SINGH, SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

body2014
Satish Kumar Mittal, J. This order shall dispose of Criminal Appeal No. D-91-DB of 2014 filed by complainant Sukhwinder Singh, and Criminal Appeal No. S-2670-SB of 2013 filed by accused Dharminder Singh alias Kala. In this case, FIR No. 77 dated 28.6.2000 under Sections 307/326/324/452/34 IPC was registered at Police Station Mukerian, against four accused, namely Malkiat Singh alias Beera; Jaswinder Singh alias Sodhi; Munsha Singh; and Dharminder Singh alias Kala. The said FIR was registered on the basis of the statement of Sukhwinder Singh, in which he alleged that his cousin sister Mohni had come to their village in the holidays from Nagpur. She was teased by accused Jaswinder Singh alias Sodhi. On that, hot words were exchanged between complainant Sukhwinder Singh and accused Jaswinder Singh alias Sodhi. The matter was reported to Sarpanch of the village, who got the matter settled between the parties. It was further alleged that on 27.6.2000, at about 9 PM, when the complainant was present in his house and door of his house was knocked, upon which he opened the door and found that accused Malkiat Singh alias Beera armed with kirpan, Munsha Singh armed with gandasi, Dharminder Singh alias Kala armed with datar and Jaswinder Singh alias Sodhi armed with kirpan were standing in the street. They pushed the door and entered the house of the complainant. Accused Malkiat Singh gave two kirpan blows on the head of the complainant, who fell down and thereafter, accused Munsha Singh gave two gandasi blows on the head of the complainant. Then the complainant was dragged into the street and accused Dharminder Singh gave a datar blow on his head and accused Jaswinder Singh alias Sodhi gave two kirpan blows on the head of the complainant. Accused also inflicted hidden injuries on the person of the complainant. When the complainant raised alarm, his father Gian Singh, PWs Gulshan Singh and Smt. Jaswinder Kaur came at the spot, who rescued him. Thereafter, the accused ran away from the spot with their respective weapons. 2. After completing investigation, challan was filed against all the four accused and charges for the offences under Sections 307, 326, 324, 452, 34 IPC were framed against them, to which they did not plead guilty and claimed trial. 3. Thereafter, the accused ran away from the spot with their respective weapons. 2. After completing investigation, challan was filed against all the four accused and charges for the offences under Sections 307, 326, 324, 452, 34 IPC were framed against them, to which they did not plead guilty and claimed trial. 3. During trial, at the stage of recording of statements of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., accused Dharminder Singh alias Kala (appellant in Crl. A. No. S-2670-SB) absconded and he was declared proclaimed offender. Statements of the remaining three accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., were recorded and they did not lead any evidence in defence. Ultimately, vide judgment and order dated 10.10.2002, the remaining three accused, namely Malkiat Singh alias Beera; Jaswinder Singh alias Sodhi; and Munsha Singh, were convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years with fine of ` 500/- each, under Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month. Accused Malkiat Singh alias Beera and Munsha Singh were further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each under Section 324 IPC, and accused Jaswinder Singh alias Sodhi was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 324 read with Section 34 IPC. All the above named three accused were further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year with fine of ` 100/- each, under Section 452 read with Section 34 IPC, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of fifteen days. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. However, all the three accused were acquitted of the charge under Section 307 IPC. 4. Feeling aggrieved against their conviction and sentence vide the aforesaid judgment and order, the above named three accused filed Crl. A. No. 1628-SB of 2002. The complainant filed Criminal Revision No. 2476 of 2002 against acquittal of all the three accused for the offence under Section 307 IPC vide the aforesaid judgment dated 10.10.2002. 5. The aforesaid appeal (Crl. A. No. 1628-SB of 2002) and the revision (Crl. Revn. No. 2476 of 2002) were heard together. A. No. 1628-SB of 2002. The complainant filed Criminal Revision No. 2476 of 2002 against acquittal of all the three accused for the offence under Section 307 IPC vide the aforesaid judgment dated 10.10.2002. 5. The aforesaid appeal (Crl. A. No. 1628-SB of 2002) and the revision (Crl. Revn. No. 2476 of 2002) were heard together. Vide judgment dated August 18, 2010, passed by this Court, the revision filed by the complainant was dismissed, whereas the appeal filed by accused Malkiat Singh alias Beera; Jaswinder Singh alias Sodhi; and Munsha Singh was disposed of with modification in the order of sentence to the extent that the sentence of rigorous imprisonment imposed upon them by the trial court was reduced to the period already undergone by them. However, the sentence of fine was enhanced to ` one lac, besides the fine already imposed by the trial court. Out of this enhanced amount of fine of ` one lac, an amount of ` 90,000/- was ordered to be paid to the complainant as compensation and the remaining amount of ` 10,000/- was to go to the State as litigation expenses. 6. After decision of the aforesaid appeal and the revision, accused Dharminder Singh alias Kala (appellant in Crl. A. No. S-2670-SB of 2013), who was proclaimed offender, surrendered in the trial court and his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. He did not lead any evidence in defence. 7. The trial court, vide judgment and order dated 22.7.2013, convicted and sentenced accused Dharminder Sigh alias Kala to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years with fine of ` 10,000/- under Section 326 IPC, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo imprisonment for a period of two months; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 324 IPC, with fine of ` 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo imprisonment for a period of one month; and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 452 IPC, with fine of ` 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo imprisonment for a period of one month. However, accused Dharminder Singh alias Kala was acquitted of the charge under Section 307 IPC. 8. Feeling aggrieved against his conviction and sentence vide the aforesaid judgment and order, accused Dharminder Singh alias Kala filed Crl. However, accused Dharminder Singh alias Kala was acquitted of the charge under Section 307 IPC. 8. Feeling aggrieved against his conviction and sentence vide the aforesaid judgment and order, accused Dharminder Singh alias Kala filed Crl. A. No. S-2670-SB of 2013. The complainant filed Criminal A. No. D-91-DB of 2014 against acquittal of accused Dharminder Singh alias Kala for the offence under Section 307 IPC vide the aforesaid judgment dated 22.7.2013. The appeal filed by the complainant is barred by limitation, therefore, an application (Crl. Misc. No. 2075 of 2014) for condonation of delay of 29 days in filing the appeal has also been filed by the complainant. 9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the impugned judgment and order. 10. Learned counsel for the respondent-State has filed custody certificate of appellant Dharminder Singh alias Kala in court today. The same is taken on record. As per this certificate, till date, appellant Dharminder Singh alias Kala has undergone 1 year 4 months and 22 days of actual sentence. 11. Learned counsel for appellant Dharminder Singh alias Kala argued that keeping in view the said custody period undergone by the appellant and the earlier decision of this Court in Crl. A. No. 1628-SB of 2002 filed by other three co-accused of the appellant, appellant Dharminder Singh alias Kala does not question his conviction. However, he prays that his sentence of imprisonment may also be reduced to the period already undergone. 12. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for appellant Dharminder Singh alias Kala. Since the conviction of co-accused of the appellant has already been upheld by this Court and their sentence of imprisonment has been reduced to the period already undergone by them, the sentence of appellant Dharminder Singh alias Kala is also reduced to the period of already undergone. As far as sentence of fine is concerned, in view of the judgment of this court in the case of the co-accused of the appellant, the sentence of fine imposed upon appellant Dharminder Singh alias Kala is enhanced to ` 30,000/-, besides the fine already imposed by the trial court. This enhanced amount of fine of ` 30,000/-, if recovered, shall be paid to the complainant as compensation. In default of payment of this enhanced amount of fine, appellant Dharminder Singh alias Kala shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month. This enhanced amount of fine of ` 30,000/-, if recovered, shall be paid to the complainant as compensation. In default of payment of this enhanced amount of fine, appellant Dharminder Singh alias Kala shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month. 13. Since acquittal of appellant Dharminder Singh alias Kala for the offence under Section 307 IPC has been upheld by this Court while dismissing the revision petition (Crl. Revn. No. 2476 of 2002) filed by the complainant vide judgment dated August 18, 2010, therefore, we do not find any reason to entertain the appeal (Crl. A. No. D-91-DB of 2014) filed by the complainant, which is also barred by limitation. Consequently, Crl. A. No. D-91-DB of 2014 filed by the complainant is dismissed and Crl. A. No. S-2670-SB of 2013 filed by accused Dharminder Singh alias Kala is dismissed with the modification in the order of sentence, as indicated above.