CourtKutchehry.com
Supreme CourtDivision Bench

SURJIT SINGH vs THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 11 July 2017 · Citation: (2017) 07 SC CK 0016

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.A. Bobde, J · L. Nageswara Rao, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
C.A. No. 2284 of 2011
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 140 words
1.

Heard learned counsel for the parties. We find that there is no reason to interfere with the the order of conviction of the petitioner. It is, however, pointed out that the petitioner is now 75 years of age and is bed ridden due to paralysis and thus not in a position to move on his own. This Fact is not disputed by learned counsel for the complainant-respondent. It is also not disputed that the dispute between the parties which is in relation to some property and grand child is now settled.

2.

In the circumstances of the case, we consider it appropriate to reduce the sentence awarded to the petitioner to the period already undergone by him. Ordered accordingly.

3.

The special leave petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

4.

In view of the above, pending applications stand disposed of.