KULWANT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard learned counsel for respondent No.2 and the learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant on quantum of sentence.

(2.) Learned counsel for convict/respondent No.2 submitted that Rajneesh Rana, aged about 35/36 years was acquitted by the learned trial Court, but was convicted under Section 306 IPC by this Court, on an appeal filed by the complainant. It is further submitted that the convict has already surrendered before the learned trial Court and is presently lodged in jail. Mother of respondent No.2 died after registration of the case while his father is presently on wheel chair. It is further submitted that there is no one to look after the father of respondent No.2. So, it is prayed that respondent No.2 be sentenced to imprisonment for the period already undergone, i.e., 01 year and 05 months (approximately). To substantiate his contention, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has placed reliance upon Mohd. Hoshan, A.P. and another Vs. State of A.P., 2002(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 155 (S.C), wherein, the accused were acquitted by the Sessions Court for offences under Sections 304-B, 306 and 498-A IPC, but in appeal, the judgment was reversed and they were convicted and sentenced for two years' rigorous imprisonment each for the offences under Sections 306 and 498-A IPC. The appeal filed by the accused against the said order of conviction and sentence was modified by the Hon'ble Apex Court and they were sentenced to imprisonment for the period already undergone by them. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 also referred to Jagsir Singh and another Vs. State of Haryana, 2004(1) R.C.R. (Criminal) 123, wherein the sentence of the accused was reduced to the period already undergone by him under Sections 306 and 498-A IPC, by the learned Single Bench of this Court.

(3.) On the other hand, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant made submissions that respondent No.2 committed heinous crime and compelled his wife to commit suicide. The punishment should be proportionate to the act committed by him. It is further submitted that the accused does not deserve any undue sympathy.