11.11.2025 Santosh and others others v. CORAM : HON'BLE HON'BLE
Case Details
IN THE THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH PUNJAB & HARYANA 222 CRA-S-192 Date of decision: 192-SB-2018 (O&M) decision: 11.11.2025 Santosh and others others ...Appellants State of Haryana Haryana and others ...Respondentss VERSUS CORAM : HON'BLE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Mr. G.B.S. Dhillon, Senior Advocate Present :- Mr. Mr. Jaskirat Singh Arora, Advocate, Mr. Advocate assisted by Advocate, for the Appellants. Ms. Ms. Chhavi Sharma, Astt. AG, Haryana Mr. Ashish Verma, Advocate for respondents Mr. Haryana. respondents No.2. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) The present appeal has been preferred The preferred against the judgment dated 25.09.2017 25.09.2017 passed in Criminal Appeal Appeal No.70 of 2014 by the Additional Sessions Sessions Judge, Hisar to the extent extent whereby,despite upholding the conviction, the private respondents have have been granted benefit of probation. 2. The present case emanates from FIR The FIR No. 1001 dated 18.12.2008 registered under under Sections 147, 148, 452 and 323 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Police Station Sadar Hisar on the basis of the statement of complainant Santosh. Santosh. A ruqa was received by the police from the General Hospital, Hisar on 17.12.2008 regarding the admission admission of injured persons, namely Ravi, Sangeeta Sangeeta and Santosh, who were were reported to have sustained injuries in a fight, fight, whereupon the police reached reached the hospital. They collected the medico-legal legal reports and recorded the statements statements of all injured persons who had been declared declared fit to depose.In her statement, statement, complainant Santosh disclosed that she she was residing in Village Kharar Kharar Alipur with her two SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.11.18 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 222 CRA-S-192-SB-2018(O&M) CRA 2 children and her her husband serves in the Army. On On 17.12.2008 at about 7:00 p.m., her brother brother-in-law Satyabir came to her house house and complained that she had taken a bett better portion of land in partition and and demanded that she hand over that land to to him. In the meantime, her jethani jethani Santra also arrived and she struck her on on the head with a danda, stating stating that she would teach her a lesson. Thereafter, Thereafter, accused Murti and Santosh reached the spot and caught hold of the complainant, complainant, while accused Santra continued continued to beat her with the danda, causing injuries to her left hand and on on both her legs. When the complainant‘s children, children, Ravi and Sangeeta, attempted attempted to intervene, accused Satyabir and Santra Santra assaulted them as well. Ravi Ravi was further beaten by accused Satyabir, Satyabir, Rajesh Naeen and Jitender. Jitender. Fearing for her life, the complainant ran ran towards the house of her neighbour neighbour Nihala, raising alarm. The accused persons persons thereafter fled from the the scene along with their weapons. respective weapons. 3. The police conducted investigation The and thereafter submitted the final report. Upon Upon supply of copies of the report report and framing of charges, both sides proceeded evidence. proceeded to lead their respective evidence. 4. On consideration of the respective respective submissions, the Court of Judicial Magistrate
Legal Reasoning
Magistrate First Class, Hisar convicted convicted the respondents-accused for offences under Sections 452 and 323 read with with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 1860. They were sentenced to undergo undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months with with a fine of ₹500/- for the offence offence under Section 452 IPC, and rigorous imprisonment imprisonment for three months with with a fine of ₹500/- for the offence under Section Section 323 IPC, vide order dated dated 28.05.2014. 5. Aggrieved thereof, the respondents Aggrieved respondents-accused preferred Criminal SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.11.18 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 222 CRA-S-192-SB-2018(O&M) CRA 3 Appeal No. 70 of of 2014 before the Court of Sessions, Sessions, Hisar. Vide judgment dated 25.09.2017, 25.09.2017, the learned Additional Sessions Sessions Judge, Hisar partly allowed the appeal appeal and modified the sentence and extended the benefit of probation to the respondents-accused. Hence, the the present appeal. 6. Learned counsel appearing on Learned behalf of the appellants vehemently contends contends that the Appellate Court gravely gravely erred in extending the benefit of probation probation to the accused notwithstanding notwithstanding that as many as twelve injuries were sustained sustained by three injured persons on the side of the appellants. It is argued that that no compensation has been awa awarded to the appellants and that once the allegat allegations stood fully proved proved after the prosecution had satisfactorily discharged discharged its burden, the grant grant of probation was wholly unwarranted. 7.
Legal Reasoning
Counsel for the respondents, on the Counsel the other hand, submits that the accused are first first-time offenders and that the incid incident was an outcome of a scuffle between between women of the same family. The The injuries alleged to have been caused in in the incident are largely superficial, superficial, being abrasions and diffuse swellings. swellings. He further contends that the respondents-accused do not suffer from any ny criminal antecedents and that that the substantive sentence awarded to them them was only six months. In In such circumstances and considering that that the respondents have not involved involved in any other case, no infirmity can be be found in the Appellate Court Court‘s decision to extend the probation. benefit of probation. 8. I have have heard learned counsel for the the respective parties and have gone through the the documents appended along with with the present appeal. 9. The operative part of the order dated The dated 25.09.2017 passed by the SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.11.18 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 222 CRA-S-192-SB-2018(O&M) CRA 4 Additional Sessions Sessions Judge, Hisar granting the respondents respondents-accused persons benefit of probation probation reads as under;- ”8. During the course of arguments, arguments, the learned counsel for the Appellants/convicts made a statement statement that he does not want to advance advance arguments on the merits merits of the case and does not challenge the impugned judgment on challenge on merits, but only wants to advance arguments on the quantum advance quantum of sentence and prayed for releasing the Appellants/convicts on releasing on probation. 9. As far as the impugned judgment judgment of conviction dated 28.5.2014 is concerned, keeping in 28.5.2014 in view the statement dated 25.9.2017 made by the learned 25.9.2017 counsel for the appellants/ convicts with regard to not challenging convicts challenging the appeal on merit, I uphold the findings of the learned uphold learned trial court given in the judgment under challenge. However judgment However as far as the order of sentence dated 28.5.2014 is concerned, sentence concerned, keeping in view the fact that the Appellants/convicts are that "first offenders" and also keeping in mind their age, character, keeping character, antecedents and family status and gravity of offences and further status further they all being middle aged women. I am of the view that it aged it is a fit case where order of sentence be modified and benefit of sentence of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Offenders Act, 1958 be provided provided to the appellants/convicts, so, the order of sentence passed by the learned trial court is set- aside and modified to the extent that aside that instead of imposing the present Appellants/convicts a sentence present sentence of imprisonment, they be released on probation for a period released period of six months on their furnishing probation bonds in the sum furnishing sum of Rs.30,000/- each with one surety of the like amount each one each for maintaining peace and good behaviour during good the period period of probation to the satisfaction of learned trial court/D satisfaction court/Duty Magistrate. The order of sentence is accordingly modified. However, sentence However, it is made clear that if during during the period of probation the the convicts commit any other crime, then the Appellants/convicts crime, /convicts shall be liable to undergo SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.11.18 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 222 CRA-S-192-SB-2018(O&M) CRA 5 the sentence, as awarded by the lea learned trial court. The appeal in hand
Decision
hand stands disposed of accordingly. accordingly. The Appellants/convicts are directed to appear before the the learned trial court Duty Magistrate within 15 days from today Magistrate today for furnishing probation bonds. Learned trial court record bonds. record be sent back along with a copy of the judgment and the record copy record of the present appeal be compliance.” consigned to the records after due compliance.” consigned 10. Insofar as the question of sentencing Insofar sentencing is concerned, it is well settled that multiple multiple considerations guide the Court, Court, including the principles of retribution, reformation, prevention, and deterrence. Ordinarily, the benefit of probation probation is extended to first-time offenders offenders, after assessing the surrounding circumstances circumstances and the ancillary events events that culminated in the commission of the offence. Where an accused accused demonstrates potential for reformation within within the framework of societal norms, norms, and the nature of the offence is not of of such gravity as would shock the conscience of the Court, the law empowers empowers the Court to afford such a perso person an opportunity to mend his conduct and and reintegrate as a responsible member member of society. Such an approach, rooted rooted in reformative justice, is both both permissible and appropriate cases. in suitable cases. 11. The aims and object of the Probation The Probation Act came to be decided by the Hon’ble Apex Apex Court in the case ofChellammal Chellammal and Another v. State reported as 2025 2025 SCC Online SC 870. The relevant relevant extract of the judgment is as under: - “26. On consideration of the precedents “26. precedents and based on a comparative study of Section 360, comparative Cr. P.C. and subsection (1) of Section Section 4 of the Probation Act, what is revealed is that the latter is wider and expansive in its latter its coverage than the former. SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.11.18 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 222 CRA-S-192-SB-2018(O&M) CRA 6 Inter alia, while Section 360 permits Inter permits release of an offender, more twenty-one years old, on probation more probation when he is sentenced to imprisonment imprisonment for less than seven seven years or fine, Section 4 of the Probation Act enables a court court to exercise its discretion in any case where the offender is found any found to have committed an offence such that he is punishable with offence with any sentence other than death or life imprisonment. Additionally, death Additionally, the non-obstante clause in sub-section gives overriding clause overriding effect to sub-section (1) of Section Section 4 over any other law for the time being in force. Also, it is is noteworthy that Section 361, 361, Cr. P.C. itself, being a subsequent legislation, engrafts a subsequent provision that in any case where the court could have dealt where with an accused under the provisions of the Probation Act but provisions but has not done so, it shall record in its judgment the special reasons record reasons therefor. 27. What logically follows from a conjoint reading of sub- section (1) of Section 4 of the Probation section Probation Act and Section 361, Cr. P.C. is that if Section 360, Cr. P.C. P.C. were not applicable in a particular case, there is no reason particular reason why Section 4 of the attracted. Probation Act would not be attracted. Probation 28. Summing up the legal position, position, it can be said that while an offender cannot seek an order for offender for grant of probation as a matter of right but having noticed matter the object that the statutory provisions seek to achieve by grant provisions of probation and the several decisions probation decisions of this Court on the point of applicability of Section 4 of the Probation applicability Probation Act, we hold that, unless applicability unless excluded, is excluded, in a case where the circumstances stated in subsection circumstances subsection (1) of Section 4 of the Probation Act are attracted, the court Probation court has no discretion to omit from its consideration release of the from the offender on probation; on the contrary, a mandatory duty is cast upon the court to consider whether the case before consider before it warrants releasing the offender upon fulfilment of the offender stated circumstances. The question of grant of probation could question could be decided either way. In SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.11.18 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 222 CRA-S-192-SB-2018(O&M) CRA 7 the event, the court in its discretion discretion decides to extend the benefit of probation, probation, it may upon considering considering the report of the probation officer impose such conditions probation conditions as deemed just and proper. However, if the answer be in proper. in the negative, it would only be just just and proper for the court to record record the reasons therefor. 12. In the the present case, there is nothing nothing on record to reflect that the respondent-accused accused possess a criminal bent of of mind or that their conduct poses any threat threat to society. Hence, by the broader broader principles of criminal jurisprudence, no no adverse presumption can be drawn drawn against them. 13. Counsel for the appellants has Counsel failed to point out any circumstance that that would render the exercise of jurisdiction jurisdiction by the Appellate Court, granting granting a reformative sentence and and extending the benefit of probation, either either erroneous or unwarranted. No material has been brought to the fore to demonstrate demonstrate that the respondents-accused accused were disentitled from receiving the benefit benefit of probation. The grounds grounds urged do not establish that the Appellate Court Court‘s approach was in any manner manner perverse or contrary to law. 14. Moreover, there is also nothing on Moreover, on record to suggest that the respondents-accused accused persons have indulged in any any other illegal/unlawful act during the pendency pendency of the proceedings in the the FIR including the present appeal. 15. In the the said scenario, no case is made made out, at this juncture, for this Court to interfere with the grant of probation extended to the respondents-accused accused persons, moreso when the incident pertains to the year 2008 and a period elapsed. period of nearly 17 years has since elapsed. SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.11.18 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 222 16. CRA-S-192-SB-2018(O&M) CRA 8 I find find that there is no illegality, perversity perversity or impropriety in the judgment dated 25.09.2017 passed in Criminal Appeal Appeal No.70 of 2014 by the Additional Sessions Sessions Judge, Hisar granting the benefit of probation to the respondents-accused accused persons. 17. 18. In view view of the above, the present revision revision petition is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall Pending shall stand disposed of. 11.11.2025 Sumit Gusain speaking/reasoned : Whether speaking/reasoned : reportable Whether reportable Yes/No Yes/No (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) (VINOD JUDGE SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.11.18 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document