← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRA-S/2813/2012disposed of

Jaskaran Singh v. State Of Punjab

2025-11-13Mr. Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj6 pages



       CRA-S-2813-SB-2012 

!"!# JASKARAN SINGH  

 STATE OF PUNJAB  

$  %&$  '( '  ) *****     



    !"   #$ %& ''''' ( '  )+ , -./ ( )    " %$"



  (**+*(  &,  -$"    .

 / &,  &

 

 $

$ 

 0,   , 1***2 $   $ $

$ 



0



 

$ 

 !3

&

"4)!

1 (*(** "  



5 63

    

 $

 

(*(**& $1** 

 ,/



"$, 

$  8&  

0  #7   /  ,   



 

 -8  "9: $

&& $    8/

&  8   &

" 

 !

 :(*:;<

" $

  

  

    

 $

 7 )

 " " =   



 

 

 "  

3$,$



3$

"



" >

,&"/

 " 

8    

$  

 /      8= / " 

& / &(*"

 $ / 1"

 / /    

    

  .   ?  

 

 "

   "   / &



 .

.

, /$      / 0

     

$



"$      / "$ , 

&,  .

 ""

   &  $ 1 A

 

  

$

  & / 

*B**( 7  

"  "    

/    "%$"

 ;

  , "$ 

, @$ $

;

 $  

 

& "  "7

/ "  "

 

 $&,

 

 



0 C 

@$

   , **  , 

 (B ,    7       "

,



 

 "



 (B,  C  7  

 



"&

,

  

  $

"

,

       "    

 

       $

$ ,      

,7  



 $"" ,

&& , " C  7 

 ,$

$ 



 *B

 $   

*0,  6. =   



 /   " $& 

 

 &     

   "$  

 $

$

$ ,& "$   



$"

"  & 

"

&

$"

$

"  ) 



 &, 

  

$



  

 



" 

7 



 $&  

, $ / $  /

" "

, $  

 %$ ;

    @$ 

$ &     

   $&

$   /  )   

   "   



$"

 B 7 ;

D&  $  .

      

00

 

 &

$ $

& / "

&$ 

,)/$   



$ &   &,

 

"  "  



$ "   

 

  E & 8"

 "     

 

   

& 



  

  

$ , 

"  .



  ?

%$   



/ $   

 , 

 

  

 $ & & 

      %$  

 &  

 

$  

 9 7$   $  

 &$

8 "

$  >



 &,  



  

    

 &

 7&,  

& ".

 ? 

$ , 

"  7

  

 ,  && 

 



,/   



    

   &?  10.

A nine judge bench of the Supreme Court of the United States, in Dennis Councle McGautha v. State of California reported as 402 U.S. 183 (1971), observed that the criteria governing sentencing neither furnish an exhaustive list of relevant considerations nor indicate how various circumstances should influence the decision-making process. In essence, these standards merely suggest broad areas for consideration and underscore the inherent difficulty in formulating uniform sentencing principles, particularly in matters of grave offences. The Court further cautioned against

01 rigidly prescribing or mandating uniform standards for sentencing, emphasizing that the principles governing punishment must depend upon the facts and circumstances of each individual case, and that no straightjacket formula can be universally applied.

(( 

) 

"  %$ . :

       5= .

 $ 6



    

, > "%$

,

 %$ , $

   ,

   &   ,     7$ , "   $ &   

 , 



$$&



 ,/  &   ,7 

$



$

? &,

/    & 



12.

7

 $



 &  & 

@$   $  ,/  ? &  "

$  7 

 

 /

 $ & 

  



" $ "

&

( ) /   &% $  

  ,  &$  

 / 

 



& 

 $ 

  &$



, (0    ,

/  %$ / $  /

 

 

  

    $

 &$

0< 

) 

$

%$" 8

$    &$       /

8 /   /

$  

  

    /  "

 /   /  &

 15.

The Court is of the opinion that sufficient mitigating circumstances exist in the present case and the same call for interference and modification in the sentence.

(< 78

 

 

 $

&,  )$ 

   , / 

F   

"%$"



     7

/ &,-$"  .

  

 (**+*(        $     

  , $

 ;

/   

 /  &,     .

    $ 1***2 

   ****2 7,   $   $  $  

&

    (

   "     $ 

GC   ,        ,( '  )/  ($ +!"!#      F 8 "2 

H2!

F 

&   H2!