The Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld the order passed by the trial court which declined an application seeking pardon under Section 306 CrPC. The court observed that it was not a case of lack of evidence and sufficient evidence was present against the accused.
Brief Facts:
The petitioner and the co-accused were alleged to have demanded money from the complainant to get sale deeds registered and only the co-accused was caught red-handed when the trap was laid. An application was filed by the petitioner under Section 306 CrPC for a grant of pardon which was declined by the Additional Sessions Judge on the ground that sufficient evidence was present against the petitioner.
Contentions of the Applicant:
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relied on Lt. Commander Pascal Fernandez vs. the State of Maharashtra and other precedents which held that the accused can move an application seeking pardon but the court is expected to seek a response from the prosecution while considering such request.
Observations of the Court:
The court observed that an application under Section 306 of CrPC for seeking pardon can be moved by a convict also and it need not necessarily originate from the prosecution only. It was further stated that the prime consideration while exercising discretion at the cost of sparing one accused from punishment is to facilitate prosecution in proving its case qua another accused, particularly the principal accused.
The court further observed that the object of pardon is not just to spare the accused but also to enable the prosecution to obtain evidence particularly where there is a lack of evidence to substantiate the case of the prosecution as in the cases of conspiracy etc. where conspiracy is hatched in secrecy or regarding certain modus operandi in respect of which complete clarity is not there. Reference was made by the court to the judgment in Suresh Chandra Bahri vs. the State of Punjab which explained the object of section 306 CrPC.
The court stated that the present case was not one involving a deep-rooted conspiracy and sufficient evidence was placed on record against the accused and there is no lack of evidence or such a case where the modus operandi of any scam is unknown. The court referred to the judgement in CBI vs. Ashok Kumar Aggarwal where it was held that only the lack of evidence could justify the grant of pardon to one of the co-accused and such an application should be examined minutely by the court and should not be accepted as a matter of right.
The decision of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition and upheld the order passed by the trial court.
Case Title: Somveer Singh vs. State of Haryana and Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill
Case No.: CRM-M-12838-2023 (O&M)
Advocate for the Applicant: Mr. P.S Sullar
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Geeta Sharma, DAG Punjab
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
