Lachhman Singh Alias Pillu vs State of Punjab

Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.—Tersely, the facts & evidence, which need a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant revision petition and emanating from the record, are that, initially, in the wake of complaint of complainant Kulveer Kaur wife of Tek Singh, a criminal case was registered against the petitioner-accused Lachhman Singh alias Pillu and his other co-accused Happy Singh (since deceased) son of Bhola Singh, by way of FIR No. 46 dated 8.5.2007, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 452, 323 and 324 read with section 34 IPC by the police of Police Station Lehra, District Sangrur. Having completed all the codal formalities, the trial Court convicted & sentenced the petitioner-convict to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years, to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- or in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days; to undergo RI for a period of one year, to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months, to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- or in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one week for the commission of offences punishable u/s 452, 324 and 323 IPC respectively. However, all the sentences were ordered to run concurrently by the trial Court, by virtue of impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 12.7.2010.

Aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the appeal filed by the petitioner-convict was dismissed as well, by the appellate Court, by means of impugned judgment dated 14.9.2011.

The petitioner-convict still did not feel satisfied and preferred the present revision petition to challenge the impugned judgments of conviction and orders of sentence, invoking the provisions of section 401 Cr.P.C.

During the course of preliminary hearing, while affirming the impugned judgments of conviction, a Coordinate Bench of this Court (Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.) issued notice regarding quantum of sentence only, by way of order dated 21.2.2012.

After hearing the Learned Counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable help and after deep consideration over the entire matter, to my mind, it will be in the interest and justice would be sub-served, if the sentence of imprisonment of two years imposed on the petitioner-convict is reduced to undergo RI for a period of one year and six months for the following reasons:-

i) As per the custody certificate dated 28.4.2012, he has already undergone the period of his substantive sentence of imprisonment of more than one year and three months out of total sentence of two years.

ii) The occurrence in this case is of 8.5.2007. So, he has already faced the pangs of protracted trial, appeal & revision for the last more than five years and four months.

iii) He is stated to be a chronic patient of epilepsy.

In the light of aforesaid reasons, the instant revision petition is hereby dismissed on merits and the impugned judgments of conviction and order of sentence of fine are maintained. However, the sentence of imprisonment of two years is reduced to undergo RI for a period of 11/2 years. The order of sentence is accordingly modified to the extent and in the manner depicted herein above. Needless to mention that necessary consequences and compliance will naturally follow accordingly.