Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 2718 (PNJ)

Bagicha Singh v. State Of Haryana

2019-10-03

SHEKHER DHAWAN

body2019
JUDGMENT : Shekher Dhawan, J. 1. Present revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 18.01.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, whereby the appeal preferred by the present petitioners against the judgment of conviction dated 05.08.2015 and order of sentence dated 06.08.2015 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kurukshetra, was dismissed. 2. The petitioners were held guilty and were convicted for commission of offence punishable under Sections 332 and 353 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 'IPC') in case F.I.R. No.132 dated 7.5.2011 registered under Sections 332 and 353 IPC, at Police Station Ladwa, Karnal and was sentenced as under:- Name of convict Offence Sentence Awarded Bagicha Singh 332 IPC Rigorous Imprisonment for one and half year -do- 353 IPC Rigorous Imprisonment for one year Richhpal Singh 353 IPC Rigorous Imprisonment for one year 3. Facts relevant for the purpose of decision of the present revision petition; an auction was organized in the Government School, Lohara on 06.05.2011 at 10:00 AM. At about 9:00 AM, as soon as Surjit Singh, Gram Sachiv started to mark the attendance, the petitioners-accused persons stopped the process of marking attendance and snatched the lease register from the Gram Sachiv and tried to tear the same. They also caught hold of the muffler (Parna) worn by said Gram Sachiv and tried to strangulate him, but he was saved by the Sarpanch and other Panches and many other persons, present at the spot. Thereafter, on the basis of letter sent by the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Ladwa to the S.H.O., Police Station Ladwa, the present F.I.R. was registered. 4. After completion of investigation proceedings, challan was presented before the trial Court. 5. During trial, learned trial Court completed various proceedings of trial including framing of charge, recording statements of prosecution witnesses and examination of the accused (petitioners herein) under Section 313 Cr.P.C. After considering the material and evidence available on record, learned trial Court held the petitioner guilty for commission of offence under Sections 332 and 353 IPC and convicted them in the manner narrated above, vide judgment and conviction dated 05.08.2015 and order of sentence dated 06.08.2015. 6. The appeal preferred by the present petitioners against the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence was dismissed by learned first appellate Court vide judgment dated 18.01.2019. 7. 6. The appeal preferred by the present petitioners against the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence was dismissed by learned first appellate Court vide judgment dated 18.01.2019. 7. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners contended that he does not challenge the judgment of conviction and a lenient view on the point of sentence be taken as the petitioners have already undergone total sentence of more than 10 months (including remissions) against the awarded sentence. 8. Learned State counsel contended that the petitioners do not deserve any concession regarding sentence and the present revision petition be dismissed. 9. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and appraisal of record, this Court is of the considered view that both the Courts below have already appreciated the evidence in its perspective manner. On the basis of documentary evidence available on the file and statements of Surjeet Singh (PW-7) and other witnesses, namely, Nasib Singh (PW-1), Avtar Singh (PW-3), Vikram Singh (PW-4) and Piara Singh (PW-5) learned trial Judge has rightly held the petitions guilty and sentenced them for commission of offence punishable under Sections 332 and 353 IPC. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra while upholding the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioners holding that the accused-persons obstructed the complainant Surjeet Singh from discharging his official duty. The judgment of conviction passed by learned trial Court, which has been upheld by learned Additional Sessions Judge do not call for any interference. As such, the present revision petition, qua judgment of conviction passed by the Courts below, stands dismissed. 10. As regard to order of sentence, this Court has certainly considered that a lenient view is to be taken in this case. The Petitioners are not previous convicts. The petitioners have already undergone total sentence of more than 10 months against the awarded sentence, taking a lenient view on the point of sentence, the order of sentence is modified that the sentence of petitioners, Bagicha Singh and Richhpal Singh in this case shall be reduced to the period they have already undergone while remaining in custody in this case. The petitioners be released from custody in this case, if not required in any other case. 11. Resultantly, the present revision petition stands disposed of in the above terms.