Partly allowed

Kartar Singh v. State Ofpunjab

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Sept 2014CRA-S/1277/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal against conviction and sentence for offences under IPC 307, 450 and Arms Act 27, the Court upheld the conviction but reduced the total combined sentence of five years RI to the period already undergone by the appellant, contingent upon a deposit of Rs. 20,000 to the dependents of the deceased complainant.

What did the court decide?

Sentence reduced to the period already undergone, subject to deposit of Rs. 20,000 with the trial Court; failure to deposit results in dismissal of appeal and enforcement of original sentence.

Kartar Singh Vs State Ofpunjab — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

Criminal Appeal No. S-1277-SB of 2003

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Criminal Appeal No. S-1277-SB of 2003 Date of decision: 18.09.2014.

Kartar Singh

..Appellant

Versus

State of Punjab

..Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

¶11

Present: Mr. Daldeep Singh, Advocate for the appellant.

¶12

Ms. Ritu Punj, Addl. AG, Punjab for the respondent – State.

¶13

Daya Chaudhary, J.

¶14

Appellant-Kartar Singh faced trial in case FIR No.38 dated 26.03.2001 for offence under Sections 307 and 450 of Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act registered at Police Station Sangat and was convicted by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda vide judgment dated 11.06.2003 and was sentenced to undergo RI for a period of three years and to pay fine of 500 with default clause for offence under Section 450 IPC, RI for a period of five years and to pay fine of 1000 with default clause for offence under Section 307 IPC and RI for a period of three years and to pay fine of `500 with default clause for offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

¶15

Said judgment of conviction and order of sentence has

¶16

NEETU RANI 2014.09.23 11:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶17

Criminal Appeal No. S-1277-SB of 2003

¶18

¶19

been challenged by the appellant before this Court by filing the present appeal by raising various grounds.

¶20

When the Court is not inclined to interfere with the conviction, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he will not contest the conviction, in case, the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that a lenient view be taken as the appellant has faced the agony of trial since registration of FIR i.e., 26.03.2001. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the appellant and complainant are brothers and now the appellant is about 68 years of age and is suffering from various ailments and complainant has also expired during the pendency of the proceedings. Learned counsel for the appellant also submits that the appellant is not a habitual offender as no other criminal case is pending against him and is ready to compensate the dependents of the family members of the deceasedcomplainant in monetary terms.

¶21

Learned State counsel has also not disputed the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant.

¶22

In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and keeping in view the limited prayer of the appellant that he does not want to contest the conviction in case, the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone; and also the fact that the appellant is facing agony of trial since registration of FIR i.e., 26.03.2001; and he has undergone half of the actual sentence

¶23

NEETU RANI 2014.09.23 11:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶24

Criminal Appeal No. S-1277-SB of 2003

¶25

¶26

against total sentence of 5 years; and no other case is pending against him; and also the fact that he is ready to compensate the aggrieved party in monetary terms, the conviction of the appellant is upheld, however, sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by him subject to deposit of an amount of `20,000/- with the trial Court within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order, which shall be released to the wife or any other dependent of the deceased complainant.

¶27

In case, the appellant fails to deposit the said amount within the stipulated period, this appeal shall be deemed to have been dismissed and the appellant shall have to undergo the remaining period of sentence as per judgment of the Appellate Court.

¶28

The appeal is disposed of with the modification of sentence by upholding the judgment of conviction as well as sentence of fine.

¶29

18.09.2014 neetu

¶30

(DAYA CHAUDHARY) JUDGE

¶31

NEETU RANI 2014.09.23 11:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Kartar Singh v. State Ofpunjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kartar Singh v. State Ofpunjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Davinder Singh Sodhi Vs State of Haryana

Chattar Singh Vs State of Hy.

Jarnail Singh Vs State of Pb.

Suresh Chand Vs Mam Raj and Others

Satya Bir Singh & Anr. Vs Haryana State Warehousing Corporation

Gurcharan Singh Vs State of Punjab