SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Harjinder Singh @ Ginni vs State Of Punjab on 4 May, 2018

CRR-344-2017 (OM) -1-


CRR-344-2017 (OM)
Date of decision: 04.05.2018

Harjinder Singh @ Ginni …Petitioner


State of Punjab …Respondent


Present:- Mr. P. S. Sekhon, Advocate,
for the petitioner.

Mr. A. S. Sandhu, Addl. A. G., Punjab.


This is a revision petition instituted by Harjinder Singh @ Ginni

son of Jasbir Singh, who was held guilty for committing offence punishable

under Section 354 and 451 of the IPC, vide judgment dated 05.09.2014,

passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Malerkotla and by order of the

even date, he was sentenced as under:

Under Section 354 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment
for a period of one year and to pay a
fine of `500/-. In default thereof, to
further undergo imprisonment for
one month.

Under Section 451 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment
for a period of six month and to pay
a fine of `500/-. In default thereof, to
further undergo imprisonment for
two weeks.

Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

Aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal against the

aforesaid judgment, however, the appeal too was dismissed by learned

Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur by order dated 13.12.2016 affirming the

1 of 4
13-05-2018 11:29:05 :::
CRR-344-2017 (OM) -2-

judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court.

Against the impugned judgments dated 05.09.2014 and

13.12.2016, passed by the trial Court as well as by the appellate Court,

accused-petitioner has come up in this revision petition before this Court.

In brief, the facts of the case, as per prosecution, are that on

29.09.2012, ASI Kulwant Singh along with the police party were present at

Bus Stand, Khurd in connection with patrolling where the complainant, wife

of Julfkar Ali, suffered a statement that she is resident of village Kothala and

her in-laws house is situated at village Bhasaur. She further stated that about

one year ago, she solemnized court marriage with Julfkar Ali, who is resident

of village Kothala. On 28.09.2012 at about 09:30 AM, she was alone in the

house as her husband, her mother-in-law Nazma and father-in-law Charag

Din had gone to the village in connection with some domestic work and her

sisters-in-law had gone to college. Somebody knocked the door of her house.

When she opened the gate, she saw a motorcycle of red colour on which one

person was sitting. Suddenly, accused-petitioner herein entered into her

house and in order to outrage her modesty, he caught hold of her right arm

and also tried to hug her. On this, she raised hue and cry and in the

meantime, her husband came there. On seeing her husband, accused-

petitioner ran away from the spot with the unidentified person who was

sitting on the motorcycle. On the statement of the complainant, a formal FIR

was registered against the accused and they were arrested. After completion

of investigation, challan was presented against accused Harjinder Singh and

Narinder Singh.

Finding a prima facie against the accused for committing offence

punishable under Sections 354 and 452 read with 34 of the IPC, they were

2 of 4
13-05-2018 11:29:06 :::
CRR-344-2017 (OM) -3-

chargesheeted accordingly, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed


After hearing both the counsel for the parties and appraising the

entire evidence and material on record, the accused-petitioner was firstly

convicted by the learned trial Court and thereafter the judgment of conviction

was maintained by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad as

mentioned in the earlier part of this judgment. However, accused Narinder

Singh @ Vicky was acquitted by the trial Court by giving him benefit of


I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the

material on record.

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner/revisionist

contended that in-fact the petitioner has already undergone substantive

period of his sentence. The total period of sentence awarded is one year.

Petitioner-revisionist has already faced protracted trial. Counsel for the

petitioner submits that he does not assail the findings of the conviction

recorded against the petitioner by both the Courts below in case his sentence

is reduced to the one already undergone by him.

Mr. A. S. Sandhu, Addl. A. G., Punjab, opposes this prayer

while submitting that there is no infirmity in the orders so passed.

There is little scope of the High Court interfering in the revision

petition filed as there is no infirmity in the orders passed. From the custody

certificate, placed on file today in the Court, it is evident that the revisionist

has already undergone 04 months and 06 days inclusive of remissions. The

total period of sentence awarded is one year. The incident is of the year 2012.

The petitioner has faced protracted trial. During the period of trial, the

3 of 4
13-05-2018 11:29:06 :::
CRR-344-2017 (OM) -4-

petitioner has undergone agony of trial. Under these circumstances, I am of

the considered view that the ends of justice would be met in case the order of

sentence is modified by reducing the sentence of the petitioner to the one

already undergone.

Therefore, while affirming the judgment of conviction of the

petitioner, the order of sentence dated 05.09.2014 which was affirmed by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur, vide judgment dated

13.12.2016; is modified by reducing the same to the one already undergone

by the petitioner. However, the sentence of fine shall remain intact.

Disposed of, accordingly.

The amount of `30,000/-, deposited by the petitioner with the

trial Court in terms of the order dated 29.03.2017, be released in favour of

the victim/complainant.

04.05.2018 (JAISHREE THAKUR)
Waseem Ansari JUDGE

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

4 of 4
13-05-2018 11:29:06 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation