Devinder Singh and Another vs State of Punjab

T.P.S. Mann, J.—This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 27.7.2001 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Faridkot whereby the Appellants were convicted u/s 308 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ - each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. They were also convicted under Sections 324/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each. They were further convicted under Sections 323/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months each. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

According to the prosecution, the occurrence had taken place on 2.11.1998 at about 6.00 p.m. when complainant Raju after grazing his cows was returning to his house and reached near the house of Nahar Singh in the street. The Appellants alongwith Jagsir Singh accused also reached there. All of them grappled with the complainant and felled him on the ground. Jagga Singh gave a kirch blow which hit on the complainant on his left ear whereas the Appellants gave kick blows on other parts of his body. On an alarm raised by the complainant, Nahar Singh and many other villagers reached there and, on seeing them, the three accused ran away.

The complainant was medico legally examined by Dr.K.K. Aggarwal on 6.11.1998, who found the following injuries on his person:

1) Stitched wound 12 cm in length was present in centre of abdomen. Blood stained bandage was present over the wound.

2) Stitched wound 3 cm in length with two stitches was present on pinna of left ear.

3) Stitched wound 4 cm in length with four stitches intact was present on front and lateral side of forehead and margin showed union.

4) Stitched wound with two stitches intact was present on top of head on left side.

After receipt of Surgeon''s opinion, Dr. K.K. Aggarwal had declared injury No. 1 as dangerous to life as it could have proved fatal in the absence of surgical intervention.

In view of the overwhelming evidence available on the file so as to sustain the conviction of the Appellants for the various offences, learned Counsel representing them has addressed the Court only on the question of sentence. He has submitted that the occurrence in question had taken place about twelve years ago. None of the Appellants was armed with any weapon. According to the prosecution, they had given kick blows to complainant Raju. None of the Appellants is a previous offender. They were aged 20 years at the time of their trial. They are the sole bread earners of their respective families. Both of them have already undergone a period of about one month out of the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon them. Therefore, the remaining sentences of imprisonment of the Appellants be set aside.

Learned State counsel has submitted that none of the Appellants deserves any concession in the matter of sentence as they had committed a serious offence by causing kick blows in the abdomen of the complainant as a result of which an injury was received by him on his chest and the same was declared dangerous to life. However, he has placed on record the custody certificates as per which Appellant Devinder Singh has undergone a period of twenty eight days while in the case of Mander Singh, the said period is one month and eleven days.

Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances,the Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by sending the Appellants behind the bars, once again, for undergoing the remainder of their sentences of imprisonment. Ends of justice would be amply met if the substantive sentences of imprisonment of the Appellants are reduced to that already undergone by them and at the same time the fine imposed upon them is enhanced so as to suitably compensate injured/complainant Raju.

Resultantly, the conviction of the Appellants for offences under Sections 308, 324/34 and 323/34 IPC is maintained. Their substantive sentences of imprisonment are reduced to that already undergone by them. The fine of Rs. 500/ - imposed upon each of the Appellants is enhanced to Rs. 10,000/ - and in default thereof the Appellants shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The enhanced amount of fine, when deposited by the Appellants, be disbursed to complainant Raju as compensation.

The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.