CRR No.204 of 2017 (OM)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRR No.204 of 2017 (OM)
Decided on: 25.05.2017
Surinderpal Singh ….Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another ….Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE REKHA MITTAL
Present : Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Ankur Jain, AAG, Punjab.
REKHA MITTAL, J.
Mr. Tejinder Singh Salana, Advocate has caused
appearance on behalf of respondent No.2.
The present petition directs challenge against consistent
findings recorded by the Courts below whereby the petitioner has been
convicted and sentenced for commission of offence punishable under
Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’), sentenced to
rigorous imprisonment for a period of 03 years with fine of Rs.2,000/-
and further imprisonment of 03 months in case of default of payment of
fine.
Notice of motion was issued limited to quantum of
sentence.
Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that Sukwinder
Kaur – respondent filed a private complaint in July, 2002 against the
petitioner, Dalip Kaur his mother and Narinderpal Singh, his brother
under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC. The trial Court vide judgment dated
12.08.2013 held the petitioner guilty of committing offence punishable
1 of 3
08-06-2017 21:03:46 :::
CRR No.204 of 2017 (OM)
2
under Section 498-A IPC only whereas all the accused were acquitted of
the offence punishable under Section 406 IPC and co-accused of the
petitioner were also acquitted of offence under Section 498-A IPC. It is
further submitted that the petitioner was awarded the maximum
prescribed sentence of 03 years by the trial Court that came to be
affirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib on
20.10.2016. The petitioner has faced agony of criminal proceedings for
the past about 13/14 years. He has suffered custody for a period of more
than 07 months and sentence including remission for more than 08
months. Out of wedlock of the petitioner and Sukhwinder Kaur, there
were two children and the elder child, a son was residing with the
petitioner. Few days back, son of the petitioner aged about 23 years
passed away and the petitioner is under tremendous tension due to
untimely death of his son and needs to be with his family in order to
share grief in the company of his other family members. It is prayed that
substantive sentence awarded to the petitioner may be reduced to the
period already undergone.
Counsel representing State of Punjab has opposed the
prayer for reduction in sentence. However, counsel for the complainant
would state that a sympathetic view may be take in the matter in the light
of fact that a grown up son of the petitioner and complainant has died.
I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the
paperbook particularly the judgments passed by the Courts below.
Marriage of the petitioner with Sukhwinder Kaur was
performed on 29.11.1993. Sukhwinder Kaur – respondent filed a private
complaint under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC on 17.07.2002. After
2 of 3
08-06-2017 21:03:47 :::
CRR No.204 of 2017 (OM)
3
conducting preliminary enquiry, accused were ordered to be summoned
vide order dated 22.10.2003. It is not clear on record as to when the
accused caused appearance before the trial Court in pursuance of
summoning order passed in 2003. However, it remains a fact that
proceedings pending before the trial Court culminated in a judgment of
conviction against the petitioner in August, 2013. As has been noticed
hereinbefore, the appeal preferred by the petitioner did not find favour
with the Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib whereby conviction
and sentence of the petitioner for offence under Section 498-A IPC were
affirmed. Indisputably, the petitioner has suffered custody for a period of
more than 07 months and sentence including remission for a period of 08
months. Unfotunately, the petitioner lost his son aged about 23 years
who was residing with the petitioner after the wife left the matrimonial
home. Counsel for the complainant has expressed his sympathy with the
petitioner due to unfortunate demise of son of the parties. Taking a
cumulative view of the facts and circumstances that the petitioner has
suffered pangs of criminal trial for the past more than 10 years coupled
with the custody period already undergone along with the fact that loss
of a young son has caused a big set-back to the petitioner, interest of
justice would be served if substantive sentence awarded to the petitioner
is reduced to the period already undergone.
For the foregoing reasons, the petition is disposed of with
modification in the aforesaid terms.
25.05.2017 (REKHA MITTAL)
yakub JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
3 of 3
08-06-2017 21:03:47 :::