Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 1612 (PNJ)

Sukhjinder Singh @ Sukha v. State of Punjab

2023-05-04

JASJIT SINGH BEDI

body2023
The present application has been filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence of the applicant-appellant, namely, Sukhjinder Singh @ Sukha son of Gurmail Singh, during the pendency of the present appeal. The applicant-appellant has been convicted and sentenced vide judgment and order dated 01.01.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur as under:- Name of accused Sections Sentence Fine In default Sukhinder Singh 379-B(1) of IPC RI for 05 years Rs.10,000/- RI 01 month 411 of IPC RI for 01 year Rs.5000/- RI 01 month 2. This appeal has been admitted and the recovery of fine was stayed on 06.07.2022. 3. The custody certificate has been placed on record by the learned State counsel, which indicates that the period of custody actually undergone by the applicant-appellant is 01 year, 08 months and 11 days out of the sentence awarded of 05 years. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant-Balkar Singh got recorded his statement to the effect that while he was travelling along with his wife on his motorcycle then two persons riding another motorcycle came from the front side slowed down and snatched a gold earrings worth Rs.10,000/- from the ear of his wife and sped away. He subsequently came to know that the persons was committed the offence were Sukhjinder Singh @ Sukha (applicant-appellant) and Lovedeep Singh @ Love. On the statement of the complainant, the FIR in question came to be registered and consequent to the submission of the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. and the conclusion of the Trial, the applicant-appellant came to be convicted and sentenced as above. 5. The learned counsel for the applicant-appellant inter alia contends that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. There was a doubt regarding the identity of the accused. No identification parade was conducted and there was a substantial delay in the registration of the FIR which remains unexplained. Since the applicant-appellant was a first-offender and had undergone 01 year, 08 months and 11 days out of his substantial sentence awarded of 05 years, he was entitled to the concession of suspension of sentence. 6. On the other hand, the learned State counsel contends that the offence is well-proved and the arguments raised by the applicant-appellant have been dealt with comprehensively by the Trial Court in its judgment of conviction. 6. On the other hand, the learned State counsel contends that the offence is well-proved and the arguments raised by the applicant-appellant have been dealt with comprehensively by the Trial Court in its judgment of conviction. Therefore, the applicant-appellant was not entitled to the concession as prayed. He, however, admits that the applicant-appellant has clean antecedents and has undergone 01 year, 08 months and 11 days out of the sentence awarded of 05 years. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 8. Admittedly, the appeal is of the year of 2022. The applicant-appellant has undergone 01 year, 08 months and 11 days out of the sentence awarded of 05 years and the appeal is not likely to be taken up for final hearing anytime in the near future. The applicant-appellant has undergone a substantial part of his sentence and is not involved in any other case. Therefore, his further incarceration is not required. 9. Keeping in view the custody period already undergone by the applicant-appellant alongwith the fact that the appeal is not likely to be heard in the near future, this application is allowed and the sentence of the applicant-appellant-Sukhjinder Singh @ Sukha son of Gurmail Singh is suspended and he is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate, concerned. 10. CRM-10967-2023 stands disposed of. Order accordingly.