Ashok Kumar vs Balkar Singh & Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 18618 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ashok Kumar vs Balkar Singh & Ors on 21 October, 2024

Author: Sandeep Moudgil

Bench: Sandeep Moudgil

                                        Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:137798



CRR-2251-2013(O&M)            -1 -




263        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH

                                        CRR-2251-2013
                                        DECIDED ON: 21.10.2024

ASHOK KUMAR
                                                                    .....PETITIONER
                                     VERSUS

BALKAR SINGH AND OTHERS

                                                                  .....RESPONDENTS

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL.

Present:    Mr. M.S. Dhammi, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Mr. Ravi Malhotra, Advocate
            for respondents No.1 to 3.

            Mr. Jaspal Singh Guru, AAG, Punjab.

            *****

SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)

1 The present criminal revision petition has been preferred against

the judgment dated 02.05.2013 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala

whereby, the sentence imposed upon respondents No.1 to 3 was set aside and

they have been directed to be released on probation under Section 4(1) of

Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 on their entering into personal bonds in the

sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of the like amount each undertaking,

therein, to appear and receive sentence, as and when called by this Court during

the period of six months. It was further directed that they shall maintain peace,

good behaviour and shall not commit any offence during the period of six

months. They are further directed to pay Rs.1000/- each as cost of the

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:137798

CRR-2251-2013(O&M) -2 -

proceedings.

2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that he

does not want to challenge the impugned judgment. However, he submits that

in view of the injuries suffered by the complainant-petitioner at the hands of

respondents No.1 to 3, his case be considered for the grant of suitable

compensation.

3. Here it would be pertinent to mention that the petitioner does not

want to challenge the order dated 02.05.2013 and only confined his relief qua

granting compensation. This Court has also scrutinized the impugned

judgments as well as the relevant documents/evidence and is of the considered

view that there is no scope for any interference in impugned judgment dated

02.05.2013 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala.

4. In view of above, the present petition stands disposed off with a

direction to respondents No.1 to 3 to pay a compensation to the tune of

Rs.50,000/- to the petitioner. The said amount shall be paid to the petitioner

within a period of two months from today, in case of failure to do so, the

petitioner would be at liberty to move an application for the revival of the

present petition.

5. Pending criminal misc. application, if any shall also disposed off.

                                                      (SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
21.10.2024                                                 JUDGE
sham

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable         : Yes/No




                                       2 of 2