The High Court of Punjab and Haryana modified the sentences of the petitioners convicted of forgery and cheating, reducing them to the period already undergone as first offenders, while dismissing the criminal revision after a protracted trial.
Substantive sentence reduced to the period already undergone.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
�������������������
�
In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
�������������������
����������������������������
Sohan Singh and another
..Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab
..Respondent
Coram: ������������ !��������"�#���$���"�!"��
Present: Mr. H.S.Grewal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. A.P.S.Gill, AAG,Punjab
��"�#���$��"�!"��%� �&'���(
Atamjit Singh, Manager, Punjab and Sind Bank, Garhshankar made an application dated 9.9.1994 to the effect that Sohan Singh came to their bank for withdrawal of some amount from Saving Bank Account No. 7173/24 on 9.9.1994. The account was in the name of Harnam Singh. On inquiry, it was found that Sohan Singh had opened the account with the bank posing himself as Harnam Singh and had deposited the cheque favouring Harnam Singh issued by the Forest Department. He was introduced by Rachhpal Singh. The matter, after reporting to the police, was investigated into by S.I. Raj Kumar. During verification of the record, it came out that Ram Pal had also withdrawn an amount of � 1000/8 from the Saving Bank Account No. 7179 of Mukhtiar Singh by impersonating as Mukhtiar Singh and that Harcharan Singh,
Kant Nirmal 2014.01.21 17:44 I am the author of this document high court chandigarh
������������������� �
Forester, and Manmohan Singh, Forest Guard, Kathgarh had prepared a forged Muster Roll for the month of March, 1994 in the name of fictitious persons and got an amount of � 1037/8 and � 747/8 as salary by impersonating Sohan Singh and Ram Pal. On conclusion of investigation, a report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short,''Cr.P.C.”) was filed before the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Garhshankar. The trial, that ensued, led to conviction of the petitioners and to award of various terms of sentences to them vide judgment of conviction and order dated 13.8.1999.
Criminal Appeal No. 3 of 1.9.1999/4.6.2002 filed by the petitioners was partly accepted by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur and vide judgment dated 31.3.2003, sentence of imprisonment imposed upon the petitioners under Section 419 of Indian Penal Code (for short ''IPC”) was reduced to the period of five months instead of one year and sentence of imprisonment imposed upon appellant Sohan Singh was reduced from two years to seven months under Section 467, IPC. Similarly, sentence of imprisonment imposed upon Ram Pal was also reduced from a period of two years to seven months under Section 468, IPC.
Challenging the conviction and order of sentence as recorded by the trial Court, the petitioners have approached this Court by way of the instant Criminal Revision under Sections 397/401 of the Cr.P.C.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
Kant Nirmal 2014.01.21 17:44 I am the author of this document high court chandigarh
������������������� �
Mr. A.P.S.Gill, AAG,Punjab for the respondent8State.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has failed to point out any illegality, irregularity, or jurisdictional error in the judgments of the courts below but has come out with a plea that the petitioners do not challenge the correctness of the findings so recorded by the courts below regarding their conviction but they may be shown leniency in the matter of sentence they being the first offenders, the only bread winners of their respective families amount involved in the matter being meager and the offence being very minor in nature. The State counsel has no objection if this prayer of the petitioners is accepted.
It is informed on behalf of the petitioners and the respondent8 State that the petitioners have already undergone three months imprisonment.
In the circumstances narrated above, coupled with the fact that the petitioners have faced the agony of a protracted trial and consequent proceedings for long, the order of sentence is modified and the substantive sentence awarded to the petitioners is reduced to the period already undergone. With the aforesaid modification in the order of sentence, the revision petition is dismissed.
January 16,2014 (MAHAVIR S.CHAUHAN) nk ��������������� JUDGE
Kant Nirmal 2014.01.21 17:44 I am the author of this document high court chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are entitled to a reduction of sentence to the period already undergone on the ground of being first offenders and meager amount involved.
Whether the High Court has the power to modify the sentence on revision under Section 401 of the Cr.P.C.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sohan Singh
Another
State of Punjab
MAHAVIR S. CHAUHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
