Balbir Singh and others vs State of Punjab

B.S. Yadav, J.

Kashmira Singh and Balbir Singh petitioners have been been convicted under section 325 and section 324 read with section 34, Indian Penal Code respectively and each has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 400/. In default of payment of fine, further rigorous imprisonment for three months has been awarded. They have also been convicted for some lesser offences under the Indian Penal Code and varying terms of imprisonment have been awarded for those offences. All the substantive sentences of imprisonment have been ordered to run concurrently. Jasbir Singh and Mohinder Singh petitioners were also convicted with the above petitioners, but the learned lower trial Court has released them on probation of good conduct.

It may be mentioned here that along with the above four petitioners, Bhagat Singh and Gurdeep Singh were also tried. The learned trial Court acquitted the former of all the charges framed against him, but convicted Gurdeep Singh along with the petitioners. In appeal, the learned appellate Court maintained the conviction of the petitioners as well as the sentences awarded to Kashmira Singh and Balbir Singh. However, it acquitted Gurdeep Singh. The four petitioners have now approached this Court by way of this revision petition which was admitted only regarding the quantum of sentence.

As prayer for releasing Kashmira Singh and Balbir Singh on probation had been made before me, it becomes necessary to give herein brief facts of the case because both under the Probation of offenders Act 1958, and section360 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, the circumstances of the case have to be kept in view. On information given by the accused party, the police had apprehended Jarnail Singh and Balwinder Singh in a case falling under section 61(1)(c) of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914. The complainant party had furnished bail for those two persons on the date of occurrence i.e. on November 30, 1983. At about 7 pm on that day the complainant party reached the bus stand of their village. The house of the accused party is close to the bus stand. Bhagat Singh (acquitted accused), who was empty handed, Mohinder Singh and Balbir Singh petitioners, armed with one `Gandasi'' each, Kashmira Singh, a `Sooa'' and Jasbir Singh and Gurdeep Singh (acquitted accused), one `Dang'' each, were found standing there. On seeing the complainant party, Bhagat Singh raised a Lalkara to the effect that the complainant Joginder Singh and his brother had got the opponents, namely, Jarnail Singh and balwinder Singh released on bail and they should be taught a lesson for furnishing bail for them. Balbir Singh gave two Gandasi blows in the head of complainant Joginder Singh, who raised an alarm. Smt. Sant Kaur, mother and Sardara Singh, father''s sister''s husband of Joginder Singh came there. Accused Kashmira Singh gave a Sooa blow in the forehead of Smt. Sant Kaur. Mohinder Singh gave a Gandasi blow on the head of Sardara Singh. Jasbir Singh petitioner and Gurdeep Singh gave blows with their respective Dangs to Smt. Sant Kaur. The injury on the forehead of Smt. Sant Kaur found grievous by the doctor. The other injuries on the injured were found simple in nature.

The learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently argued that the case of Kashmira Singh and Balbir Singh cannot be distinguished from that of Jasbir Singh and Mohinder Singh, who have been released on probation by the trial Court. Those two accused were released on probation by the trial Court as they were less than 21 yeas of age. Probation was refused to Balbir Singh and Kashmira Singh as they were aged 25 and 26 years respectively.

I do not find any ground to release Balbir Singh and Kashmira Singh on probation. They along with others caused injuries to Joginder Singh, Sardara Singh and Smt. Sant Kaur on vital parts. The injury found on the forehead of Smt. Sant Kaur was grievous in nature as bone underneath was cut. It is not a case of sudden quarrel. The attack upon the complainant party was preplanned.

The learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the report of the District Probation Officer has been called in respect of Balbir Singh and Kashmira Singh and he has recommended the release of those petitioners on probation. In his report regarding Kashmira Singh, the District Probation Officer has mentioned that the opposite party had attacked the accused party while in the case of Balbir Singh he has made the same remark and has further mentioned that it was a case of sudden provocation. These remarks appear to have influenced the mind of the District Probation Officer for recommending Kashmira Singh and Balbir Singh petitioners on probation. Both the learned Courts below have found that it was the accused party who had attacked the complainant party after premeditation.

The accused had attacked the complainant party with deadly weapons like Gandasis, Sooa and Dangs merely because it had given bail bonds for Jarnail Singh and Balwinder Singh. The circumstances of the case do not justify that Kashmira Singh and Balbir Singh should be released on probation.

The learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon a judgment of this Court rendered in Pritam Singh and another v. The State of Punjab (Criminal Revision No. 887 of 1983) by K.P.S. Sandhu, J., on July 29, 1983. In that case, one accused had been convicted under section 325 and the other one under section 325 read with section 34, Indian Penal Code, and for some other lesser offences under that Code. The learned Judge released those accused on probation. The injuries for which the accused had been held liable under section 325 or section 324 read with section 34, Indian Penal Code, were on the nonvital parts of the body i.e. on the arms of the injured. In the present case, the injury for which the petitioners have been convicted under section 325 read with section 34 Indian Penal Code, was on the forehead of Smt. Sant Kaur i.e. vital part of the body.

Lastly, the learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the sentence awarded to the petitioners Kashmira Singh and Balbir Singh for the offence under section 325 and section 324 read with section 34, Indian Penal Code, respectively be reduced. The learned trial Court has already taken a very lenient view. Only one year''s rigorous imprisonment has been awarded to the said petitioners for that offence. I do not find any ground to reduce the sentence.

For the foregoing reasons. I do not find any force in the present revision petition and the same is hereby dismissed.