Parveen Kumari v. State Of Punjab And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision : May 03, 2024 Parveen Kumari ....Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab and others ....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present :

Mr. Rajat Dogra, Advocate for Mr. S.P.S. Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Raghav Garg, DAG, Punjab KULDEEP TIWARI,J. (ORAL) 1.

The learned trial court vide judgment 5.2.2015, convicted respondents no. 2 to 4, and vide order of the even date, sentenced them as under:- Convict name Under Section Sentence Arjun Shukila 325 IPC To undergo RI for two years and to pay fine of Rs 3000/-; In default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for three months Arjun Shukila 323 IPC To undergo RI for six months and to pay fine of Rs 500/-.; In default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for two months Tirloki Nath and Yadwinder Singh 325 IPC read with section 34 IPC To undergo RI for two years each and to pay fine of Rs 3000/-each. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for three months each.

Convict name Under Section Sentence Tirloki Nath and Yadwinder Singh 323 IPC read with section 34 IPC To undergo RI for six months each, and to pay fine of Rs 500/- each. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for two months each.

2.

Having aggrieved with the judgment of conviction and order of sentence (supra), respondents no. 2 to 4 preferred an appeal which was partially accepted by the learned appellate court, concerned, as the conviction was maintained. However, the order of sentence was modified, and they were ordered to be released on probation on their furnishing personal probation bonds in the sum of Rs 20,000/- each, and thereby, to submit an undertaking to be of good behaviour for a period one year from the date of pronouncement of the judgment, by the learned appellate court concerned, and further ordered to compensate the injured/complainant, for an amount of Rs 10,000/- by invoking the provisions of Section 357 Cr.P.C., to be paid by accused-Arjun Shukila, to whom injury under Section 325 IPC, has been attributed specifically.

3.

The petitioner has maintained the present revision petition on account of non payment of compensation amount, as awarded by the learned appellate court concerned. 4.

This Court has considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, but is unable to accept the same. In case issue is of non payment of compensation amount, as

awarded by the learned appellate court concerned, the petitioner has different remedy. The instant petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to raise all the grievance, which has been raised in the instant revision petition, by making an appropriate motion, before an appropriate court/fourm.

5.

Disposed of accordingly.

( KULDEEP TIWARI ) May 03, 2024 JUDGE 'tiwana'

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No Whether Reportable ?

Yes/No