Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SANJAY VASHISTH, J.
Chanan Singh & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
CRA-S-102-SB of 2005 (O&M)
Decided On : 08-02-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. discussion on compromise between parties. (Para 4) |
| 3. court's examination of compromise validity. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. consequences of compromise on sentencing. (Para 8 , 12 , 14) |
| 5. final order maintaining conviction, reducing sentences. (Para 15) |
JUDGMENT
Mr. Sanjay Vashisth, J.
This judgement shall dispose of CRA-S-102-SB-2005 and CRA- S-118-SB-2005, which have been filed by the respective convicts in version and cross-version cases.
2. CRA-S-102-SB-2005, has been filed by appellants Chanan Singh, Bawa Singh, Sarwan Singh @ Sama, Bachittar Singh, and Karaj Singh, respectively, against the judgement of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.12.2004, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Fast Track Court, Amritsar (for brevity 'Ld. Trial Court'), in Sessions Case No. 116 of 17.01.2000/08.06.2004. Accused/appellants were held guilty for commission for the offences punishable under Sections 148 , 450, 307, 326/149, 324/149, 323/149, 328/149 of IPC and each one of them were ordered to undergo sentence(s), as detailed in the following table:
| Name of Convict | Under Section | Sentence | Fine | In Default |
| Chanan Singh | 148 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
|
| 450 IPC | 05 years RI | Rs. 500/- | 02 months RI | |
| 307 IPC | 07 years RI | Rs. 1000/- | 03 months RI | |
| 326/149 IPC | 03 years RI | Rs. 500/- | 02 months RI | |
| 324/149 IPC | 02 years RI |
|
| |
| 324/149 IPC | 02 years RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 328/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| Bawa Singh | 148 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
|
| 450 IPC | 05 years RI | Rs. 500/- | 02 months RI | |
| 307/149 IPC | 07 years RI | Rs. 1000/- | 03 months RI | |
| 326/149 IPC | 03 years RI | Rs. 500/- | 02 months RI | |
| 324 IPC | 02 years RI |
|
| |
| 324/149 IPC | 02 years RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 328/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| Sarwan Singh @ Sama | 148 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
|
| 450 IPC | 05 years RI | Rs. 500/- | 02 months RI | |
| 307/149 IPC | 07 years RI | Rs. 1000/- | 03 months RI | |
| 326/149 IPC | 03 years RI | Rs. 500/- | 02 months RI | |
| 324/149 IPC | 02 years RI |
|
| |
| 324/149 IPC | 02 years RI |
|
| |
| 323 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| Bachhittar Singh | 148 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
|
| 450 IPC | 05 years RI | Rs. 500/- | 02 months RI | |
| 307/149 IPC | 07 years RI | Rs. 1000/- | 03 months RI | |
| 326/149 IPC | 03 years RI | Rs. 500/- | 02 months RI | |
| 324/149 IPC | 02 years RI |
|
| |
| 324/149 IPC | 02 years RI |
|
| |
| 323 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| Karaz Singh | 148 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
|
| 450 IPC | 05 years RI | Rs. 500/- | 02 months RI | |
| 307/149 IPC | 07 years RI | Rs. 1000/- | 03 months RI | |
| 326 IPC | 03 years RI | Rs. 500/- | 02 months RI | |
| 324/149 IPC | 02 years RI |
|
| |
| 324 IPC | 02 years RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 328/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
| |
| 323/149 IPC | 01 year RI |
|
|
All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The period of detention already undergone by the accused-appellants was ordered to be set off against the substantive sentence.
3. CRA-S-118-SB-2005, has been filed by appellants Gurvail Singh, Pargat Singh, Kulwinder Singh @ Manna, Baldev Singh @ Deba, and Sewa Singh, respectively, against the judgement of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.12.2004, passed by Ld. Trial Court, in Sessions Case No. 117 of 2002. Accused/appellan
The court has inherent powers to quash convictions based on compromise, considering the voluntariness of the settlement and the absence of public disturbance.
Court can consider compromise in non-compoundable offences when fixing the quantum of sentence, reducing it as per mutual agreement of the parties.
The court may consider amicable settlements in non-compoundable offences for sentencing, reducing the sentence based on the absence of further disputes and the passage of time.
Quash of Criminal Proceeding - Amicable settlement – Power of High Court must have due regard to nature and gravity of crime - Ends of justice in terms of the compromise showing parties willingness t....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
