JANAK SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Assailed in this petition is the judgment dated 20.12.2002, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Barnala, dismissing the appeal of the petitioner-accused (herein referred as 'the accused') against the judgment dated 19.10.2001, passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Barnala, convicting and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- under Section 420 IPC. Charge against the petitioner is that he cheated Amarjit Singh, Sukhdev Singh, Chamkaur Singh, Avtar Singh and Darbara Singh, by grabbing a sum of Rs.50,000/- each from them for sending them abroad i.e. Abudhabi. He received the amount but he neither sent them abroad nor returned the amount. The petitioner was charged, tried and ultimately convicted and sentenced accordingly. His appeal also failed. Without assailing the judgment of conviction, learned counsel for the petitioner has urged for extending some leniency on the quantum of sentence.

(2.) Even otherwise, on scrutiny of the impugned judgment, no such illegality much less irregularity or perversity was pointed out or detected which may render the judgment as invalid, therefore, the findings returned by the Courts below regarding conviction stand affirmed. Now coming to the quantum of sentence, it is noticed that the occurrence took place way back in the year 1997. The petitioner has already suffered a lot of agony due to pendency of proceedings for such a long time in various Courts. He has already undergone five months three days of the substantive sentence. Learned counsel has also undertaken on behalf of the petitioner that the latter would pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- each to Amarjit Singh, Sukhdev Singh, Chamkaur Singh, Avtar Singh and Darbara Singh which he had received dishonestly from them. Under these peculiar circumstances, it would be in the fitness of things to extend some leniency on the quantum of sentence.

(3.) Resultantly, this petition is dismissed with the modification in the sentence which is reduced to already undergone without any alteration in the sentence of fine. However, the petitioner would comply with the undertaking, given by learned counsel for the petitioner in the Court, within three months from today, failing which he would face the consequences thereof.