Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mohit vs State Of Haryana on 6 August, 2024
Author: Manjari Nehru Kaul
Bench: Manjari Nehru Kaul
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:103703
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
255
1. CRR-2188-2019
Date of decision: 06.08.2024
Mohit .....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana .....Respondent
2. CRR-2582-2019
Date of decision: 06.08.2024
Pawan .....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others .....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL
Present : Mr. Rajesh Lamba, Advocate
for the petitioner in CRR-2188-2019.
Mr. Johan Kumar, Advocate and
Dr. S.K. Bhar, Advocate
for the petitioner in CRR-2582-2019.
Mr. Yuvraj Shandilya, AAG, Haryana.
****
MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J.
1. This order shall dispose of abovementioned revision
petitions as they arise out of the same FIR and impugned orders.
2. The petitioners are challenging the judgment dated
21.08.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad,
whereby the appeal preferred by them against the judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 16.12.2016, passed by learned
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Faridabad in case FIR No.9 dated
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:103703
CRR-2188-2019
CRR-2582-2019
14.01.2011 under Sections 323, 341, 427, 452, 506, 34 of the IPC
registered at Police Station Sadar Ballabgarh, Faridabad, vide which the
petitioners were convicted and sentenced as follows, was dismissed:-
Offence(s) Period of sentence Fine Period of sentence
under imposed in default of
Section payment of fine
323 IPC RI for 06 months - -
341 IPC RI for 06 months - -
427 IPC RI for 06 months - -
452 IPC RI for 01 year - -
506 IPC RI for 06 months - -
2A. All the sentences were ordered to be run concurrently.
3. The prosecution's case in brief may be noticed as thus: On
14.01.2011, a complaint was filed by Mahesh (hereinafter referred to as
'the complainant') with the police, reporting a dispute with Dheeraj; the
complainant alleged that about six months ago, Dheeraj in an inebriated
state, entered his house and indulged in abusive language. Although
with the intervention of the Panchayat, the matter was settled between
the parties, however, on the night of 13.01.2011, the accused party,
armed with sticks and iron rods, entered the house of the complainant,
named intimidated, and assaulted him and his family. On a hue and cry
raised, neighbours of the complainant were attracted to the spot. On the
following morning, around 08:30 A.M, while the complainant was
going in his car, the accused party, including the petitioners, cornered
them with a tractor loaded with bricks, smashed the windows of the car,
and attacked the complainant before fleeing away from the spot. The
complainant then filed the FIR in question. On the basis of
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:103703
CRR-2188-2019
CRR-2582-2019
investigation, challan was presented against the petitioners and charges
framed. The prosecution in support of its case examined six witnesses.
During trial, the petitioners while getting their statements recorded
under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. denied all the allegations and
incriminating evidence appearing against them; had claimed innocence
and false implication in the case in hand.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners have at the outset, fairly
admitted that in view of the findings of fact recorded by both learned
Trial Court as well as the learned Appellate Court, they would not press
the present petitions on merit. Instead, they would limit their prayer to
the quantum of sentence only. It has been urged that the alleged
occurrence relates back to the year 2011 and the petitioners have
endured the ordeal of protracted criminal proceedings for nearly 13
years. Furthermore, learned counsel have highlighted that after the
alleged occurrence, the petitioners have been leading a disciplined and
law abiding life and have not been involved in any other criminal case.
Hence, a lenient view be taken and the quantum of sentence awarded by
the learned Trial Court be reduced to the period already undergone by
the petitioners. It has also been submitted that sentencing the petitioners
behind bars at this juncture of their life would serve no useful purpose.
5. Learned counsel for the State has, on instructions, not
disputed that after the occurrence in question in the year 2011, the
petitioners have maintained good conduct and have not been involved
in any other untoward incident or criminal case. Learned counsel for the
State has also filed the custody certificates of the petitioners, which are
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:103703
CRR-2188-2019
CRR-2582-2019
taken on record subject to all just exceptions.
6. A perusal of the custody certificates also do not reveal the
involvement of the petitioners in any other criminal case.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
relevant material on record.
8. In view of the fact that the occurrence in question pertains
to the year 2011, and as has not been disputed by the learned State
counsel, the petitioners have been leading a disciplined life ever since
then, this Court does not deem it appropriate to send the petitioners
behind bars at this juncture; they have undeniably been also burdened
with numerous liabilities in the preceding 13 years.
9. The ends of justice would be, thus, met if while
maintaining the conviction of the petitioners, their substantial sentence
of one year is reduced to the period already undergone by them subject
to compensation of Rs.10,000/- each to be paid to the complainant
within next two months. In addition, the petitioners shall also plant 03
indigenous fruit bearing trees and 03 shady trees each within the
judicial complex in Faridabad, with the specific area to be identified by
the District Legal Services Authority concerned within two months
from today; the DLSA would also ensure proper maintenance and
upkeep of the trees so planted.
10. However, it is made clear that in case of non-deposit of
compensation with the trial/successor Court and non-plantation of trees
as directed above, within a period of two months from the date of this
order, benefit of reduction of sentence shall not accrue to the petitioners
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:103703
CRR-2188-2019
CRR-2582-2019
and they will be required to undergo the remaining part of the sentence
awarded to them. On deposit of compensation, the enhanced amount of
compensation shall be disbursed to the complainant, against proper
identification.
11. With the aforesaid modifications, both the revision
petitions stand disposed of.
06.08.2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL)
Vinay JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
5 of 5
