Jagjit Singh vs State of Punjab

Sabina, J.—Petitioner-Jagjit Singh was convicted for an offence under Sections 326 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code (`IPC'' for short) vide judgment dated 24.11.2009 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class Moga. Vide order of even date, Petitioner was ordered to undergo the following sentence:

Under Section 326 IPC

To undergo RI for 3 year and to pay fine of Rs. 4500/-

Under Section 324 IPC

To undergo RI for 1 year and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-

All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved by the same, Petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed with the following modification by the Additional Sessions Judge Moga vide judgment dated 27.8.2010:

Under Section 326 IPC

To undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 � year and to pay a fine of Rs. 4500/-

Under Section 324 IPC

To undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-

To undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 1/2 year and to pay a fine of Rs. 4500/-

Under Section 324 IPC

To undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-

Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Hence, the present revision petition. The brief facts of the case, as noticed by the Appellate Court in Para 3 of its judgment, are as under:

"3. Tersely put, the case of prosecution is that on 6.5.2005 at about 9.15 P.M., in the area of City Moga, in furtherance of common intention of both the accused, accused Jagjit Singh voluntarily caused grievous injury to complainant Inderjit Singh with Kirch, which is a sharp edged weapon and thereby accused Jagjit Singh committed an offence u/s 326 IPC whereas accused Shinder Pal Singh committed an offence u/s 326 read with Section 34 IPC. Further, on the same date, time and place, accused Jagjit Singh with the common intention of his co-accused Shinder Pal Singh, voluntarily caused simple injury to complainant Inderjit Singh and thereby committed an offence u/s 324 IPC, whereas, his co-accused Shinder Pal Singh committed offence u/s 324 read with Section 34 IPC. After completion of investigation, both the accused were challenged to face trial in this case."

During the course of arguments, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, has not challenged the conviction of the Petitioner under Sections 326, 324 IPC but has submitted that the sentence qua imprisonment of the Petitioner be reduced to already undergone by him. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the Petitioner is the sole bread earner of the family and is facing the criminal proceedings for the last five years.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, it is a fit case where the sentence qua imprisonment is liable to be reduced to already undergone by the Petitioner. Petitioner has undergone about seven months of actual sentence and is not involved in any other criminal case as is evident from the custody certificate of the Petitioner placed on record by the learned State counsel. However, it would be appropriate to allow some compensation to the injured Inderjit Singh.

Hence, the conviction of the Appellant u/s 326, 324 IPC is maintained. However, the sentence qua the imprisonment of the Petitioner is reduced to already undergone by him. Petitioner is directed to pay additional fine to the tune of Rs. 10,000/-. The said amount of additional fine be released to injured Inderjit Singh forthwith. Petitioner is directed to deposit the additional fine imposed by the trial Court, (if not already deposited) within two months from today failing which the appeal shall stand dismissed.