Harjit Singh Alias Jeeta and Ors. Vs State of Punjab

FIR No.	Dated	Police Station	Section
31	12.05.2019	Purana Shalla	307, 326, 324, 323, 325, 341, 427, 506, 148, 149 IPC
Crimin Session	al Case numb s Court	er before the	Sessions Case No.124 of 30.08.2019 CIS No.SC-201-2019 CNR No.PBGD01-008878-2019
Date of	Decision		08.08.2022/16.08.2022
Names	of convicts/ap	pellants	Harjit Singh alias Jeeta; Jasbir Singh alias Preet; Jasbir Singh alias Bahman; Kulwinder Singh alias Sabhi alias Baba; Balwinder Kumar alias Babbu
Convic	tion under sec	tion	307/324/325/323/341/148/149 IPC
Sentenc	e imposed		Maximum RI for 4 years along with fine.

¶15

ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.05.19 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

¶16

��

¶17

CRA-S-2085-2022

¶18

1. Seeking setting aside of the judgment of conviction/sentence, whereby the appellant-convicts stand convicted and sentenced, as mentioned above, they have come up before this Court by filing the present criminal appeal. 2. Counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants and the complainant/victim(s) are neighbours and after their conviction, they have amicably settled the matter with the complainant party vide compromise-deed dated 12.07.2023 (Annexure A-4). He has further submitted that the appellants are young persons and they would be contented and satisfied if the sentence imposed upon the appellants is reduced to the period already undergone by them.

¶19

Counsel for the complainant did not dispute the contention made on behalf of the appellants that a compromise has been effected between the parties. 4. On the basis of the custody certificates dated 11.05.2026, State counsel opposed the prayer made on behalf of the appellants on the ground that the appellants have been convicted for a heinous offence punishable under Section 307 IPC and have undergone only about one year of the actual sentence awarded to them.

¶20

At this stage, counsel for the appellants, while referring to the mitigating circumstances, has submitted that appellants No. 2 to 5 are in the age group of 27 to 35 years, whereas appellant No. 1 is aged about 52 years, and all of them are the sole breadwinners of their respective families.

¶21

I have heard counsel for the parties as well as the State.

¶22

Perusal of the custody certificate reflects that appellant(s) have already undergone about one year of the substantive sentenced imposed upon them.

¶23

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned State counsel, coupled with the compromise arrived at between the parties and the mitigating circumstances pointed out on behalf of the appellants, this Court is of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be adequately met in case the order of conviction is maintained, but the substantive sentence imposed upon the appellants is reduced to the period already undergone by them. However, the appellants shall remain liable to pay the fine as imposed by the trial Court.

¶24

Consequently, the present appeal is partly allowed to the extent that while maintaining the judgment of conviction/order of sentence dated 08.08.2022/16.08.2022 passed by the trial Court, the substantive sentence imposed upon the appellants is reduced to the period already undergone by them. However,

¶25

ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.05.19 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

¶26

��

¶27

CRA-S-2085-2022

¶28

the appellants shall deposit/pay the fine/compensation amount, as imposed by the trial Court, within a period of one month from today, if not already deposited. In default of payment of fine/compensation, the appellants shall further undergo imprisonment for a period of one month.

¶29

With the aforesaid observations, the present appeal stands disposed of. Bail bonds and surety bonds are discharged. All pending applications, if any also stand disposed of.

¶30

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

¶31

19.05.2026 AK

¶32

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No

¶33

ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.05.19 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

Harjit Singh Alias Jeeta and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harjit Singh Alias Jeeta and Ors. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Varun Trading Company and Another Vs M/S Ajay Enterprises and Others

Virender Rana Vs State of Haryana and Another

Resham Singh Vs Ashu Jindal and Another

Amar Nath Vs the Nawanshahr Central Cooperative Bank Limited and Another

Sukhwinder Singh Vs Gurmukh Singh

Indusind Bank Ltd. Vs Satender Singh