Punjab-Haryana High Court
Joginder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 8 May, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:064202
CRA-S-1805-SB-2003 -1-
103
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRA-S-1805-SB-2003 (O&M)
Date of decision: 08.05.2024
Joginder Singh and another
... Appellants
Vs.
Union Territory, Chandigarh (wrongly mentioned as State of Punjab)
... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Present: Mr. Simran Singh, Advocate for
Mr. Ranjan Lakhanpal, Advocate
for the appellants.
Mr. Manish Bansal, Public Prosecutor, U.T. Chandigarh
assisted by Mr. Shubham Mangla, Advocate and
ASI Padam Singh.
*******
HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL)
1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment of
conviction dated 27.08.2003 and the order of sentence of even date passed
by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, in FIR No.173 dated
31.10.1997 under Sections 332, 333, 353 read with Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC'), registered at Police Station West,
Chandigarh, vide which the appellants were convicted under Sections 333 &
353 read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:064202
imprisonment for a period of two and half years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-
along with default mechanism.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 31.10.1997 at about 10.30
p.m., one Bahadur Singh came to the police station and he informed that
brawl took place at the house of Joginder Singh and MHC of the police
station deployed Constable Rajbir Singh and Constable Khushi Ram outside
his house. Joginder Singh and his brother-in-law Laddi along with one more
person, who could be identified by complainant/Constable Khushi Ram, if
produced before him, came there. Joginder Singh was armed with lathi and
others armed with dandas came outside the house. They started abusing the
complainant as to why they had come there and gave lathi blows to the
complainant and Constable Rajbir Singh. Joginder Singh gave lathi blow to
Constable Rajbir Singh, which hit on his left arm. Accused Laddi gave a
danda blow to Constable Rajbir Singh near his ear. The complainant
succeeded in escaping and he went to meet SI Hari Kumar and he stated that
third accused managed to run away from the spot. It is further stated by the
complainant that the accused persons obstructed them in discharging their
duties and assaulted them. The accused persons threatened the complainant
to teach a lesson, as one of the accused was stated to be a Clerk in the office
of an Advocate. Joginder Singh, Laddi and one more accused were under the
influence of liquor. After recording statement of the complainant/Constable
Khushi Ram, SI Hari Kumar sent the same to Police Station West,
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:064202
Chandigarh and the FIR (supra) was registered.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the judgment
passed by learned trial Court is based on conjectures and surmises. It is
further submitted that the appellants don't have any criminal antecedents and
have old parents and family to look after. Learned trial Court failed to
appreciate the fact that appellant No.2 Narinder Singh @ Laddi was not
identified by some of the prosecution witnesses. They are facing trial for the
last 27 years and therefore, learned trial Court ought to have considered the
case of the appellants for releasing them on probation under Section 361
Cr.P.C read with Sections 3 & 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.
4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, U.T. Chandigarh
supports the judgment passed by learned trial Court, while contending that
the appellants had misused and abused the process of law by giving false
evidence on oath before the Court and therefore, they were rightly convicted
and sentenced by learned Court below.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record of the case with their able assistance.
6. Sections 3 & 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 & 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
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:064202
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 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....."
7. 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."
8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, judgment
passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, convicting the
appellants, is upheld, however, having regard to the fact that there are no
criminal antecedents against the appellants and they have actually undergone
sentence of 01 month 08 days out of total sentence of two and half years, this
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:064202
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 appellants, it is directed that they shall be released on
probation for good conduct on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/-
each with surety of the like amount and on further furnishing an undertaking
to keep the peace and good behaviour for a period of one year, to the
satisfaction of learned trial Court concerned. The appellants shall remain
under the supervision of the concerned Probation Officer during the
aforesaid period. It is further directed that if the appellants fail to comply
with the said directions or commit breach of the undertaking given by them,
they will be called upon to undergo the sentence imposed upon them by
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh.
9. With the aforesaid directions, instant appeal stands allowed.
10. All the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also
stand disposed of.
[ HARPREET SINGH BRAR ]
08.05.2024 JUDGE
vishnu
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
5 of 5
