Shiv Dass vs State of Punjab

Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.—Challenge in this criminal revision petition is to the order dated 3.9.2013 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, whereby the appeal filed by petitioners Shiv Dass and Swaran Dass challenging their conviction and sentences for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 34, IPC, recorded by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar, was dismissed after modifying the substantive sentence.

At the time of preliminary hearing of present criminal revision petition on 7.2.2014, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in view of the concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below, he did not want to challenge the conviction of the petitioners. However, he submitted that the main accused Gopal Dass, who was attributed an injury attracting the mischief of Section 326, IPC, on the person of Balwant Singh, has since died and the petitioners had already suffered incarceration for one year, therefore, notice of motion was issued with regard to the quantum of sentence only.

In response to the notice issued by this Court, the learned counsel for the State has put in appearance.

Though the learned counsel for the petitioners has confined his submissions with regard to the quantum of sentence awarded to the petitioners, but to satisfy the conscience of this Court, the material available on record has been re-appraised.

From the depositions of Kanso PW1, Amarjit Singh PW2 and Balwant Singh PW3 (injured persons) Dr. Gurmanjit Rai PW4 (who medico-legally examined all the three injured persons) and deposition of Sub Inspector Harjinder Singh PW6, this Court is of the considered opinion that both the courts below have rightly held the petitioners guilty for the offences for which they have been convicted and, as such, the learned counsel for the petitioners has rightly opted not to contest this revision petition so far as conviction of the petitioners is concerned.

However, on quantum of sentence, the learned counsel contends that the occurrence had taken place on 28.09.1999 on a trivial issue of scolding the domestic help of petitioners and when the injured persons intervened, the petitioners along with Gopal Dass and Surta Dass, their co-accused, caused injuries to them. The injury attracting the mischief of Section 326, IPC, on the person of Balwant Singh, was attributed to Gopal Dass, who has since died during trial. Surta Singh, yet another co-accused of the petitioners, had also expired during the trial. Proceedings qua Gopal Dass and Surta Singh had abated. Petitioner No. 1, Shiv Dass, who is aged about 45 years, had caused simple injuries by means of Dang and similarly petitioner No. 2-Swaran Dass, aged about 47 years, who was also armed with Dang had caused simple injuries on the person of Kanso, Amarjit Singh and Balwant Singh. It has also been contended that both the petitioners have suffered incarceration for more than one year. They are neither required nor involved in any other case. During trial and appeal, for the last approximately 15 years, they have suffered a lot of agony. He submits that the petitioners would be satisfied if their sentence is ordered to be reduced to the period already undergone by them.

Learned counsel for the State has produced two affidavits of the Superintendent, Central Jail, Amritsar, showing the period of incarceration suffered by petitioners, Shiv Dass and Swaran Dass, which are taken on record. He has also not controverted the factual aspect, as narrated by the learned counsel for the petitioners. However, he submits that in view of multiple injuries received by prosecution witnesses No. 1 to 3, adequate compensation be awarded to them.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance gone through the material available on record.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners with regard to reduction of the substantive sentence. Concededly, the occurrence had taken place in the year 1999. For the last 15 years, the petitioners are facing agony of trial, appeal and revision. Both the petitioners have suffered incarceration for more than one year. It is also not in dispute that both the petitioners, namely, Shiv Dass and Swaran Dass were armed with dangs and they had inflicted simple injuries on the persons of three injured. Both the petitioners are married and they have children to maintain. They are neither required nor involved in any other case. Motive for quarrel was also trivial.

Keeping in view the overall position of the case, the substantive sentences of petitioners, Shiv Dass and Swaran Dass are ordered to be reduced to the period undergone by each one of them. However, it is ordered that each of the petitioners would pay Rs. 15,000/-, (totalling Rs. 30,000/-) as compensation to be shared by all the three injured, i.e. Rs. 10,000/- each. The amount of compensation shall be deposited by the petitioners with the learned trial Court within two months of the passing of the order. In case the petitioners fail to comply with the said order, then the order of sentence passed by learned appellate Court shall enure. After receipt of the compensation amount, the learned trial Court shall issue notices to Kanso PW1, Amarjit Singh PW2 and Balwant Singh PW3 (injured persons) for withdrawal of the compensation amount of their share. The fine imposed by the appellate Court shall remain undisturbed.

With the above modification in the order of sentence, the present criminal revision petition is partly allowed.