Mehta @ Babit vs State Of Haryana And Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 1598 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Mehta @ Babit vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 24 January, 2024

                                                        Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:010879




                                                               2024:PHHC:010879
CRR-576-2017                                                                  1
238         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                         AT CHANDIGARH

                                                                 CRR-576-2017
                                             Date of Decision: January 24, 2024

MEHTA @ BABIT                                                  ........Petitioner

                                    Versus

STATE OF HARYANA                                               ........Respondent

                                                                 CRR-675-2017
                                             Date of Decision: January 24, 2024

GURPREET SINGH                                                 ........Petitioner

                                    Versus

STATE OF HARYANA                                               ........Respondent


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present:    Mr. Subhash Godara, Advocate
            for the petitioners

       Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG Haryana
                             ****
HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL)

CRR-576-2017 and CRR-675-2017

1. This order of mine shall dispose of the abovementioned two

criminal revision petitions as these are arising out of the same FIR. For the

sake of bravity, the facts are taken from CRR-576-2017.

2. The present revisions are preferred against the judgment of

conviction dated 07.02.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Court,

Fatehabad whereby the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated

24.02.2015 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate Ratia, District

1 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:010879

2024:PHHC:010879

Fatehabad has been partly modified in FIR No. 245 dated 26.06.2011 under

Sections 148, 149, 323, 506 IPC registered at Police Station Ratia, Fatehabad.

FACTUAL MATRIX

3. The facts, in brief, are that the complainant Amandeep Singh gave

a statement to the police alleging therein that aunts (Parwinder Kaur and

Kulwinder Kaur) had come to visit him and his family when his cousins

namely Gauna, Giani, Raju and their mother Rami started hurling abuses to his

aunts. Further, they rang up their brother, Gurpreet Singh (present petitioner),

who arrived at the spot with Ashok; Surjeet Kaur and Mehta @ Babit (present

petitioner), armed with sticks, and they all proceeded to beat the complainant

and his aunts. When the complainant tried to rescue his aunts, Ashok held him

down while the petitioner Gurpreet Singh struck him on his head with a stick.

The complainant and his aunts were finally rescued by the complainant's father

and one Jaspal Singh from the clutches of the accused. Resultantly, the instant

FIR came to be registered against the present petitioner and six other persons.

4. The learned trial Court, after assessing the material on record,

charged all the accused for committing an offence under Sections 148, 323,

506 read with Section 149 IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed

trial. Following trial, all accused were held guilty vide judgement dated

24.02.2015 and were awarded the following sentence vide order dated

27.02.2015 by the learned trial Court: -

2 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:010879

2024:PHHC:010879

Offence Sentence

Section 148 IPC Rigorous imprisonment of 2 years and a fine of Rs.

1000/- each, in default of which simple imprisonment for six months.

Section 149 IPC Rigorous imprisonment of 2 years and a fine of Rs.

1000/- each, in default of which simple imprisonment for six months Section 323 IPC Rigorous imprisonment of 1 year and a fine of Rs. 500/-

each, in default of which simple imprisonment for three months.

Section 506 IPC Rigorous imprisonment of 2 years and a fine of Rs.

1000/- each, in default of which simple imprisonment for six months.

5. Aggrieved by the same, the convicts preferred an appeal before

the lower Appellate Court, which was allowed vide judgment dated

07.02.2017. While conviction under Section 149 IPC was set aside as it is not a

substantive offence, whereas conviction under Sections 148, 323 and 506 IPC

was upheld. With respect to the order of quantum of sentence, the lower

Appellate Court modified the sentence for six of the eight convicts namely

Gona, Gyani, Raju, Rami, Surjeet Kaur and Ashok, and ordered for their

release on probation of good conduct for a period of one year under Section

4(1) of the Probation of Offenders Act, whereas sentence of the present

petitioners was upheld.

CONTENTIONS

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that he is not assail-

ing the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated

24.02.2015/27.02.2015 on merits and restricts his prayer to modification of the

order of quantum of sentence to that of the release of the petitioners on proba-

tion of good conduct.

3 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:010879

2024:PHHC:010879

7. Further, it is contented by the learned counsel for the petitioners

that all the other convicts in this case have been released on probation.

Additionally, according to the medico-legal report, all injuries have been

declared simple in nature. Moreover, the complainant, who in his complaint

stated that he was struck on the head with a stick by one of the petitioners has

now turned hostile. Lastly, the counsel urged the Court to take a lenient view of

the matter as the petitioners have reformed and intend to live their lives as law-

abiding citizens.

8. Learned State counsel has no objection to the restricted prayer of

the petitioners, so long as the conviction of both the petitioners is upheld.

OBSERVATIONS AND ANALYSIS

9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper

book with their able assistance.

10. Section 3 and 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act empower the

courts to release the offenders on probation of good conduct in the cases and

circumstances mentioned therein. Similarly, Sections 360 and 361 of the

Cr.P.C also empower the courts to release the offenders on probation of good

conduct in the cases and circumstances mentioned therein. A two Judge Bench

of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Som Dutt and others Vs. State of Himachal

Pradesh (2022) 6 SCC 722 speaking through Justice Bela M. Trivedi, has held

as under:-

"6....having regard to the fact there are no criminal antecedents against the appellants, the court is inclined to give them the benefit of releasing them on probation of good conduct. In that

4 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:010879

2024:PHHC:010879

view of the matter, while maintaining the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellants, it is directed that the appellants shall be released on probation of good conduct....."

A two Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lakhvir Singh

Vs. State of Punjab (2021) 2 SCC 763 speaking through Justice Sanjay

Kishan Kaul, has held as under:-

"6. We may notice that the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the said Act explains the rationale for the enactment and its amendments: to give the benefit of release of offenders on probation of good conduct instead of sentencing them to imprisonment. Thus, increasing emphasis on the reformation and rehabilitation of offenders as useful and self-reliant members of society without subjecting them to the deleterious effects of jail life is what is sought to be subserved."

11. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the judgment

passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad awarding a

sentence of 2 years under Sections 148 and 506 IPC and a sentence of 1 year

under Section 323 IPC to the petitioners is upheld, however, having regard to

the fact that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents, this court is inclined

to give them the benefit of probation of good conduct. In that view of the

matter, while maintaining the conviction and sentence imposed on the

petitioners, they are ordered to be released on probation of good conduct on

furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 20,000/- each with a surety each of the like

amount, and on further furnishing an undertaking to keep the peace and good

behaviour for a period of two years, to the satisfaction of the concerned trial

court within a period of two weeks. The petitioners shall remain under the

supervision of the concerned Probation Officer(s) during the aforesaid period.

5 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:010879

2024:PHHC:010879

It is further directed that if the petitioners fail to comply with the said

directions or commit breach of the undertaking given by them, they shall be

called upon to undergo the sentence imposed upon them by the learned

Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad.

12. With the aforesaid directions, the instant petitions stand disposed

of.

                                           (HARPREET SINGH BRAR)
                                                 JUDGE

24.01.2024
Ajay Goswami
                  Whether speaking/reasoned               Yes/No
                  Whether Reportable                      Yes/No




                                                           Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:010879

                                       6 of 6