IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mehinder Singh Sullar
Criminal Appeal No.971-SB of 2000
Amar Singh & Ors.
v.
State of Punjab
{Decided on 19/11/2012}
a) Facing agony of protracted trial for more than 18 years.
b) First time offender with no history of previous conviction.
c) Only injuries with lathis are attributed to appellants.
d) Appellants also sustained multiple grievous injuries by complainant party & they have already been acquitted.
e) Appellants ready to pay compensation to complainant--Probation of Offenders Act, 1960--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.360. (Para 28)
(B) Probation of Offenders Act, 1960, S.4--Probation--Grant of--Section 4 would have overriding effect, shall prevail if the conditions depicted therein are fulfilled--Meaning thereby, the Court has the ample power to release the first offender of minor offences on probation, keeping into focus the nature & manner of the crime, age of the offender, other antecedents and attending circumstances of the offence instead of committing him to jail. (Para 25)
Mr. Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.: (Oral) - The matrix of the facts and evidence, unfolded during the course of trial, culminating in the commencement, relevant for disposal of the instant criminal appeal & emanating from the record, is that, initially, in the wake of complaint of Harjinder Singh son of Rachan Singh, a criminal case was registered against Surmukh Singh s/o Surjan Singh, his son Harinder Singh, Avtar Singh son of Lachhman Singh and Sohan Singh son of Ujagar Singh, vide FIR No.82 dated 11.11.1994, for the commission of offence punishable under section 308 read with section 34 IPC by the police of Police Station Morinda, Distt.Ropar.
2. Sequelly, the prosecution claimed that during the course of same very incident/occurrence, complainant Ranjit Kaur (PW3) and her daughter Jasbir Kaur (PW4) also sustained injuries at the hands of appellant-convicts. Therefore, on the statement (Ex.PO) of complainant Ranjit Kaur, the present cross case was also registered against appellantconvicts Amar Singh, Mohinder Singh, Bhag Singh, Harpit Singh, Major Singh & main accused Harjinder Singh (proclaimed offender).
3. In the instant cross case, the prosecution claimed that on 3.11.1994, the appellant-convicts, having consumed liquor, came on the roof of house of complainant Ranjit Kaur (PW3) and started throwing brick bats in her court-yard. Thereafter, they came down in her court yard. Accused Harjinder Singh (proclaimed offender) armed and gave a sword blow on her (Ranjit Kaur) right elbow. As soon as, her daughter Jasbir Kaur (PW4) came to rescue her, in the meantime, Harjinder Singh gave another sword blow on her left hand. Appellant Harpreet Singh alias Pinki, Major Singh and Mohinder Singh were stated to have caused injuries to Ranjit Kaur with their respective lathis. Thereafter, Harjinder Singh (PO) gave another sword blow on the front side of left leg of Ranjit Kaur. Appellants Amar Singh and Bhag Singh were claimed to have continued giving lathi blows on the person of Ranjit Kaur and her daughter Jasbir Kaur PWs. In the meantime, PW7 Harinder Singh, son of complainant, came on the tractor from the fields. Appellant Harpreet Singh alias Pinki was stated to have given a lathi blow on his back as well. All the injured raised alarm. Thereafter, the appellants decamped from the place of occurrence with their respective weapons. The injured were removed to the hospital, where they were medico legally examined. In the background of these allegations, the present cross case was registered against the appellant-convicts, by virtue of same very FIR No.82 dated 11.11.1994, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 148, 323, 325 and 452 read with section 149 IPC by the same police of Police Station Morinda, Distt.Ropar in the manner depicted here-in-above.
4. After completion of the investigation, the police submitted the final police report (challan). Accordingly, the appellant-convicts were charge-sheeted for the commission of the offences punishable under sections 148, 323, 325 and 452 read with section 149 IPC by the trial Court.
5. Likewise, the complainant party was also separately chargesheeted under section 308 read with section 34 IPC in cross-case by the trial court and the case was slated for evidence of the prosecution, which ultimately ended in acquittal.
6. In the instant cross case, the prosecution, in order to substantiate the charges framed against the appellant-convicts, examined PW1 Dr.Sanjeev Kumar, PW2-Dharam Singh, PW3 complainant Ranjit Kaur, PW4 Jasbir Kaur, PW5 Sumukh Singh, PW6 C.Taranjit Singh, PW7 Harinder Singh and PW8 SI Balbir Singh in the oral evidence. The prosecution has also placed reliance on the application of police (Ex.PA), writing of doctor (Ex.PB), information (Ex.PC), MLR of Jasbir Kaur (Ex.PD), x-ray report (Ex.PF), MLR of Ranjit Kaur (Ex.PG), x-ray report of Ranjit Kaur (Ex.PI), MLR of Harinder Singh (Ex.PJ), rapat No.21 (Ex.PM), Rapat roznamcha (Ex.PN),
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.