BAWA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 17.12.2002 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced for various offences, detailed hereinbelow: - <FRM>JUDGEMENT_796_LAWS(P&H)5_2014.htm</FRM>

(2.) DURING pendency of the appeal, one of the appellants namely Bawa Singh son of Natha Singh passed away and accordingly, the appeal preferred by Bawa Singh is dismissed having stands abated. Counsel for the appellants namely Hari Singh, Gurmeet Singh and Makhan Singh has submitted that he does not press the appeal in regard to conviction of the appellants for the aforesaid offences but the appellants deserve leniency in the matter of sentence in view of the attending circumstances in the case.

(3.) COUNSEL submitted that the criminal proceedings were initiated against the accused in September 1994 and a period of two decades has elapsed in between. The motive for occurrence in question is stated to be effort of Bawa Singh (since deceased) to recover possession of land in dispute. It is argued that injury constituting offence under Section 307 IPC has been attributed to Hari Singh and Hari Singh has suffered custody for a period of about 4 years including remissions out of substantive sentence of five years for offence punishable under Section 307 IPC. Makhan Singh to whom injury constituting offence under Section 326 IPC has been attributed has also suffered custody for a period of 6 months and 19 days. The said injury is statedly sustained by the injured victim on thumb of his hand, therefore, on non -vital part of the body. Counsel has argued with vehemence that it was brought on record in view of testimony of Dr.K.K. Singh, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Batala that Bawa Singh, Hari Singh accused (appellants) sustained seven injuries each and Dalbir Kaur was inflicted three injuries reflected in their medico legal reports Ex.DA to Ex.DC. It is further argued that keeping in view the number and nature of injuries sustained by the accused, the present case is a case of version and cross -version though the police failed to initiate action against the complainant party for causing injuries to Hari Singh and others and as a result, a criminal complaint was filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate but he is not sure about the fate of said proceedings as the appellants have lost their contact with him. The last submission made by counsel is that keeping in view the character and antecedents of the appellants coupled with the facts and circumstances obtaining in the present case, the substantive sentence awarded to the appellants for the aforesaid offences may be reduced to the period already undergone.