Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 132 (PNJ)

Gurmail Singh v. State of Punjab

2024-01-12

ALOK JAIN

body2024
JUDGMENT Mr. Alok Jain, J. (Oral) The present appeal has been filed by the appellants against the judgment dated 01.04.2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridkot whereby Gurmail Singh-appellant No. 1 and Angrej Kaur-appellant No.2 were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 01 year under Sections 324/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. Brief facts of the case as per the prosecution are that on 10.12.2005 ASI Narinder Singh recorded Ex.PA statement of Shamsher Singh complainant/injured wherein he stated that on 10.12.2005 at about 1:00 P.M., he along with his mother Surjit Kaur and father Mukhtiar Singh were working in the fields. Mukthiar Singh, his father was working in the other portion of land and was visible to the complainant. Suddenly his mother raised an alarm that Mukhtiar Singh was encircled by the assailants. He saw that Sukhmander Singh armed with Kirpan, Gurmail Singh armed with spear, Roop Chand, Gurpreet Singh Gagandeep Singh, Ajmer Singhy, Tikka Singh, Pirthi Singh, Amaijit Kaur, Sukhdev Kaur, Karamjit Kaur, Angrej Kaur, Veerpal Kaur, Parkash Kaur and Gurdev Kaur had encircled his father and Sukhdeep Singh was exhorting them. When Shamsher Singh went forward to save his father, Gurmail Singh gave a spear blow in order to kill him which hit his left temporal region. An alarm was raised by him and he was rescued by his mother and brother Krishan Singh. Motive behind the occurrence was that 14 Kanalsand 18 Marlas of land was owned by his mother which is in dispute and on account of that injuries were caused to Shamsher Singh. 3. As per the custody certificate filed by the state, the appellants, neither during the trial nor after their conviction have remained in custody. However, vide order dated 22.09.2023, it was recorded : "Learned counsel for the appellants) has reasserted their entire arguments and have prayed that in the above circumstances and considering the age of the appellant(s) to be more than 70 years, the present appeal be disposed of by upholding the conviction, however, the appellant(s) be released on probation of good conduct under the Probation of Offenders Act. 4. In light of the prayer made by the learned counsel for the appellants above, the conviction of the appellants Gurmail Singh and Angrej Kaur is upheld. 4. In light of the prayer made by the learned counsel for the appellants above, the conviction of the appellants Gurmail Singh and Angrej Kaur is upheld. However, it is a fit case to invoke the provisions of The Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 as: i. The occurrence pertains to 10.12.2005, i.e., about 19 years old and the conviction was awarded on 01.04.2009 i.e., about 15 years ago. ii. The appellant no. 1-Gurmail Singh is around 76 years of age and appellant no.2-Angrej Kaur is 71 years of age as of today; iii. No other case has been lodged against them during all these years; iv. The fact it was a version and cross version case i.e., the appellants in this case are the complainants in another case arising out of the same incident; and v. The appellants have been convicted under Section 324 of the IPC which is not a heinous offence as the maximum punishment provided under the same is three years or fine or both. 5. In light of the above, the appellants-Gurmail Singh and Angrej Kaur be released on probation on the ground of good conduct for a period of six months on the following conditions as enshrined under section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. i. They shall individually execute a bond for good behavior with two solvent sureties in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- which shall be executed before the trial Court within a period of one month from today. ii. The said bond shall remain in force for a period of six months. iii. They shall, subject to the conditions laid down in the Probation of Offenders Act, remain under the supervision of a Probation Officer. 6. It is clarified that in case, there is any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the appellants shall forthwith be taken into custody and shall have to undergo the sentence awarded to them by the trial Court. 7. In light of the above, the appeal stands disposed of.