High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRR/1680/2014disposed of

Gurmit Singh & ORS v. State Of Punjab & ORS

2015-01-12Mr Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain2 pages

Crl. Revision No. 1680 of 2014 (O&M) -1- In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Revision No. 1680 of 2014 (O&M) Date of decision: 12.1.2015 Gurmit Singh alias Meeta and others ......Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

Present:

Mr. R.K.Girdhar, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Deep Singh, AAG, Punjab.

None for respondents No. 2 and 3.

**** SABINA, J.

Petitioners along with their co-accused had faced the trial qua commission of offence punishable under Section 392, 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC' for short) in FIR No. 79 dated 26.2.2008, registered at Police Station Sadar Fazilka. Trial Court vide judgment/order dated 27.7.2013 ordered the conviction and sentence of the petitioners under Section 392, 323 IPC. Aggrieved against the said judgment/order of their conviction and sentence, petitioners preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by the Appellate Court vide order dated 22.4.2014. Hence, the present petition by the petitioners.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioner No. 1 was known to the complainant and, in fact, as per the prosecution case itself, petitioner No. 1 along with complainant GURPREET SINGH 2015.01.13 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Crl. Revision No. 1680 of 2014 (O&M) -2had gone to Punjab to purchase a tractor. However, now the parties have amicably settled their dispute. Learned counsel for the petitioners has not challenged the conviction of the petitioners under Section 392, 323 IPC but has submitted that sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioners be reduced to the period already undergone by them.

Vide order dated 18.9.2014, parties were permitted to appear before the Trial Court for recording of their statements with regard to compromise effected between them.

In pursuance to the said order, parties appeared before the Trial Court. As per the report of the Trial Court, compromise effected between the parties is voluntary and without any duress, coercion and threat of any kind and has been effected in order to maintain peace and harmony and cordial relations between the parties.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, it would be just and expedient to reduce the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioners to the period already undergone by them.

Accordingly, conviction of the petitioners under Section 392, 323 IPC is maintained. However, sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioners is reduced to the period already undergone by them.

Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(SABINA) JUDGE January 12, 2015 Gurpreet GURPREET SINGH 2015.01.13 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh