Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harbans Kaur And 4 Ors vs State Of Haryana on 5 September, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115630
CRR No. 3208 of 2014 2023:PHHC:115630
[1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRR No. 3208 of 2014 (O&M)
Date of decision: 4th September, 2023
Harbans Kaur and others
Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana
Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN
Present: Mr. Rahul Vats, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, DAG, Haryana.
AVNEESH JHINGAN, J (Oral):
1. This is a revision petition aggrieved of conviction and quantum
of sentence in case of FIR No. 537 dated 16.12.2008, under Sections 419,
420, 423, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Ratia.
2. The brief facts are that FIR was registered at the instance of
Jarnail Singh. It was stated that after the death of Santa Singh, the
complainant along with his brother Karnail Singh, mother Balbir Kaur and
sister Dalwinder Kaur inherited the land. Petitioners No. 2 to 4 and 7
impersonated deceased-Santa Singh, Harbans Singh, Gurmej Kaur and
Chhindro Kaur and got a sale deed dated 18.3.2008 registered of the land
in question in favour of petitioner No.1-Harbans Kaur.
3. The trial court after appreciating the facts and considering the
evidence adduced, convicted the respondents under Sections 419, 423, 467,
468, 471 and 120-B IPC vide judgment dated 5.10.2012. Vide order of even
date, they were sentenced as under:
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115630
CRR No. 3208 of 2014 2023:PHHC:115630
[2]
Section Sentence
419 IPC Rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to
pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each. In case of non-payment
of fine, all the convicts shall further undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of four months.
423 IPC Rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to
pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each. In case of non-payment of
fine, all the convicts shall further undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of fifteen days.
467 IPC Rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to
pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each. In case of non-payment
of fine, all the convicts shall further undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of four months.
478 IPC Rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to
pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each. In case of non-payment
of fine, all the convicts shall further undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of four months.
471 IPC Rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to
pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each. In case of non-payment
of fine, all the convicts shall further undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of four months.
120-B IPC Rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to
pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- each. In case of non-payment of
fine, all the convicts shall further undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of one month
All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The appeal
filed was dismissed on 11.9.2014. Hence the present petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners is not challenging the
conviction, however, restricts the prayer for reducing the quantum of
sentence. He relies upon the fact noted by the appellate court that in civil
proceedings that the matter was compromised and the sale deed in favour
of Harbans Kaur was declared null and void. He submits that petitioner
No. 1 is 80 years, a lenient view be taken in view of the facts of the case.
5. The learned counsel for the State has produced custody
certificates. As per the custody certificates, the petitioners have undergone
the sentence as under:
Name of the petitioner Sentence undergone
Harbans Kaur Four months and seven days
Satnam Singh Four months and twenty four days
Jagtar Singh Four months and twenty four days
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115630
CRR No. 3208 of 2014 2023:PHHC:115630
[3]
Amrik Kaur Four months and seventeen days
Gurnam Kaur Four months and seventeen days
6. The Supreme Court in Murali v. State rep. By the Inspector of
Police, 2021(1) SCC (Cri.) 487 reiterating its earlier view in Ram Pujan v.
State of UP (1973) 2 SCC 456 held:
10. Notwithstanding thereto, it appears to us that the fact of
amicable settlement can be a relevant factor for the purpose of
reduction in the quantum of sentence. In somewhat similar
circumstances where the parties decided to forget their past
and live amicably, this Court in Ram Pujan v. State of UP
[(1973) 2 SCC 456], held as follows:
"6. The only question with which we are concerned, as
mentioned earlier, is about the sentence. In this respect
we find that an application for compromise on behalf of
the injured prosecution witnesses and the appellants was
filed before the High Court. It was stated in the
application that the appellants and the injured persons,
who belong to one family, had amicably settled their
dispute and wanted to live in peace. The High Court
thereupon referred the matter to the trial court for
verification of the compromise. After the compromise was
got verified, the High Court passed an order stating that
as the offence under Section 326 of the Penal Code, 1860
was non-ompoundable, permission to compound the
offence could not be granted. The High Court all the
same reduced the sentence for the offence under Section
326 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code, 1860 from
four years to two years"
7. In the absence of any challenge to the conviction is upheld.
However, considering that the petitioners have clean antecedents, the matter
has been compromised and the land has been returned back, the quantum of
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115630
CRR No. 3208 of 2014 2023:PHHC:115630
[4]
sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by the petitioners.
8. The revision petition is disposed of.
[AVNEESH JHINGAN]
JUDGE
4th September, 2023
mk
1. Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes / No
2. Whether reportable : Yes / No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115630
4 of 4
