VARINDER PAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE matter that arises for consideration in this revision petition is with record to the sentence imposed upon the petitioner -Varinder Pal.

(2.) AT the relevant time, Varinder Pal had taken a contract for the construction of the bridge over the Sanglana Cho. P.W. 7, Shri N. K. Kapur was incharge of this work being' the Superintending Engineer of the Haryana Urban Development Authority, Panchkula at that time. The case against the petitioner is that on April 11, 1982 at about 9 -30 p.m. Shri N.K Kapur received an anonymous telephonic call to the effect that 100 bags of cement, which had been saved from the work relating to the construction of the bridge were likely to be disposed of by the next morning. On getting, this call, Shri N. K Kapur called the two Executive Engineers P.W. 5, M. S. Mighlani, and P.W. 6, M. P. Bhandari and told them about this. They decided that the cement should immediately be checked. They all left for the site at the bridge. The Chaukidar of the petitioner -contractor was there and he was asked for the keys of the store. The Chaukidar, however, told them that the keys were with the petitioner. Shri N.K Kapur thereupon deputed the Chaukidar from the Water -Works to sleep there and not to allow any cement to be reproved from the store until it had been checked in the morning. Instructions were also given at the main store that no further cement be issued to the contractor until fresh directions were given in this behalf. The Superintending Engineer and the two Executive Engineers thereafter returned home. On reaching his residence, the Superintending Engineer Shri N. K. Kapur found the petitioner there and he was dead drunk and was making a lot of noise and abusing every one. The petitioner had entered the house by breaking open the door of the lobby and had thereafter also tried to break the wire gauze, shutter of the drawing -cum -dinning: room. The glass of the dressing table and the base of the mixi had also been damaged in the bed -room. The wife and children of the Superintending Engineer had also been threatened. The loss caused by the petitioner was estimated at Rs. 2000/ -, It is in respect of this matter that the petitioner now stands sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/ - in default of 3 months' rigorous imprisonment under section 451 of the Indian Penal Code and six months' rigorous imprisonment under sections 427 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code each count.

(3.) IN dealing with this matter, it must be appreciated that each case has to be seen and considered in the light of its own facts. The offences in the present case were committed by a Government contractor against the person and property of the family members of his controlling officer namely, the Superintending Engineer. The provocation for his doing so was merely the zeal of this officer to avoid theft or pilferage of Government property. It was apparent that the petitioner had come to the house of the Superintending Engineer after due deliberation and that too while under the influence of liquor. Such a case cannot, but be taken serious note of and clearly warrants no leniency. Taking an over -all view of the circumstances of the case, it must indeed be held that no occasion is provided here for any reduction in the sentence imposed upon the petitioner. This revision petition is thus dismissed. The Petitioner, who is on bail is directed to surrender to his bail bonds to undergo unexpired term of imprisonment imposed upon him. Revision dismissed. 1. 1978 (82) Suppl Cr R 483. 2. 1979 CAR 385 (SC)