O&M) CRA v. Punjab State of Punjab
Case Details
(O&M); CRR-693-2005 (O&M) CRA-S-1746-SB-2004 (O&M); 2004 (O&M); 2004 (O&M); CRA-S-2058-SB-2004 (O&M) 2005 (O&M) & CRA-S-254-SB-2005 (O&M) & 2004 CRM-A-551-MA-2004 ( 1 ) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh At Chandigarh Karam Singh Karam Singh … Petitioner CRR R-693-2005 (O&M) Versus Nirmal Singh & others Nirmal Singh & others ... Respondents Nirmal Singh Nirmal Singh … Appellant CRA-S-1746-SB-2004 (O&M) CRA Versus Punjab State of Punjab ... Respondent Shamsher Singh Shamsher Singh … Appellant CRA-S-2058-SB-2004 (O&M) CRA Versus Punjab State of Punjab ... Respondent of Punjab State of Punjab … Appellant CRA-S-254-SB-2005 (O&M) CRA Versus Nirmal Singh & another Nirmal Singh & another ... Respondents State of Punjab State of Punjab … Appellant CRM M-A-551-MA-2004 (O&M) Versus Gurdev Singh & others Gurdev Singh & others ... Respondents Date of Decision:- 22.01.2025 Date of Decision VIMAL KUMAR 2025.01.29 12:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M); CRR-693-2005 (O&M) CRA-S-1746-SB-2004 (O&M); 2004 (O&M); 2004 (O&M); CRA-S-2058-SB-2004 (O&M) 2005 (O&M) & CRA-S-254-SB-2005 (O&M) & 2004 CRM-A-551-MA-2004 ( 2 ) CORAM:
Legal Reasoning
GURVINDER SINGH GILL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Ms. Kirandeep Kaur, Advocate . Kirandeep Kaur, Advocate, for Mr. Kamaldip Singh Sidhu, Advocate, Mr. Kamaldip Singh Sidhu, Advocate, for the applicant/petitioner(s) in CRR-693-2005. for the applicant/petitioner(s) in Mr. K.S. Hissowal, Advocate, for the appellant in CRA-S-1746 for respondents No.1, 4, 5 and 6 respondents No.1, 4, 5 and 6 in CRR-693-2005. 1746-2004 and Mr. Pratap Singh Gill, Ms. Eknoor Kaur Sra & Mr. Pratap Singh Gill, Ms. Eknoor Kaur Sra & Ms. Harmilonjot, Advocates, for the appellant in CRA-S-2058 for respondent No.2 in CRR-693 2058-SB-2004 and 693-2005. tri, Addl.A.G., Punjab. Mr. Siddharth Attri, Addl.A.G., Punjab. GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J 1. This judgment shall dispose of above is judgment shall dispose of above-mentioned set of mentioned set of 4 appeals and a revision petition. The details of which are stated herein under: revision petition. The details of which are stated herein revision petition. The details of which are stated herein Appeals against conviction: Appeals against conviction Case No. Parties Name CRA-S-1746-SB 2004 CRA-S-2058-SB 2004 SB- Nirmal Singh Vs. State of Punjab SB- Shamsher Singh Vs. State of Punjab the the Findings of Findings of Court Convicted and sentenced and sentenced to undergo RI for 7 years to undergo RI for 7 years under Section 307 IPC under Section 307 IPC and sentenced Convicted and sentenced to undergo RI for 7 years to undergo RI for 7 years under Section 307 IPC under Section 307 IPC trial Relief Sought Appellant seeks acquittal Appellant seeks acquittal State appeal against acquittal: State appeal against acquittal CRM-A-551- MA-2004 State of Punjab Vs. 1. Gurdev Singh (expired) 2. Kewal Singh, 3. Ajit Singh (expired) 4. Jassan Singh Respondents Respondents acquitted stand State seeks setting aside stand of respondents’ acquittal and for convicting them State appeal for enhancement of sentence: State appeal for enhancement of sentence: SB- CRA-S254-SB 2005 State of Punjab Vs. 1. Nirmal Singh 2. Shamsher Singh stand stand Respondents Respondents convicted and sentenced and sentenced RI for 7 years to undergo RI for 7 years State seeks enhancement of imposed sentence upon the respondents VIMAL KUMAR 2025.01.29 12:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document ( 3 ) Respondents No.1 & 2 Respondents No.1 & 2 stand convicted, whereas stand convicted, whereas to 6 to 6 respondents No.3 respondents No.3 stand acquitted (O&M); CRR-693-2005 (O&M) CRA-S-1746-SB-2004 (O&M); 2004 (O&M); 2004 (O&M); CRA-S-2058-SB-2004 (O&M) 2005 (O&M) & CRA-S-254-SB-2005 (O&M) & 2004 CRM-A-551-MA-2004 Revision by injured/victim: Revision by injured/victim: 2005 CRR-693-2005 Karam Singh Vs. 1. Nirmal Singh 2. Shamsher Singh 3. Gurdev Singh (expired) 4. Kewal Singh 5. Ajit Singh (expired) 6. Jassan Singh 7. State of Punjab sentence two Injured/victim – Karam Singh seeks enhancement imposed of upon convicts, namely, Nirmal Singh (respondent No.1) & Shamsher Singh (respondent No.2) AND ALSO seeks conviction remaining of respondents except respondent No.7 apart from seeking compensation the 2. 6 dated 04.06.2001 registered at Police The matter arises out of FIR No.6 dated 04.06.2001 registered at Police The matter arises out of FIR No. Station Kot Ise Khan, under Sections Kot Ise Khan, under Sections 307, 447 447, 148, 149 IPC & 27 of the Arms Act lodged at the instance of Ikattar Singh ( Arms Act lodged at the instance of Ikattar Singh (Akatar Singh), wherein he alleged that on account of land dispute, the accused, namely, Nirmal he alleged that on account of land dispute, the accused, namely, Nirmal he alleged that on account of land dispute, the accused, namely, Nirmal Singh, Shamsher Singh, Gurdev Singh, Kewal Singh, Ajit Singh and Singh, Shamsher Singh, Gurdev Singh, Kewal Sing Singh, Shamsher Singh, Gurdev Singh, Kewal Sing had inflicted injuries with the help of fire arms to the Jassan Singh had inflicted injuries with the help of fire arms to the Jassan Singh complainant (Ikattar Singh), Karam Singh, Daljit Singh and Karnail complainant (Ikattar Singh), Karam Singh, Daljit Singh and Karnail complainant (Ikattar Singh), Karam Singh, Daljit Singh and Karnail All the said six accused were tried by the Court of learned Singh. All the said six accused were tried by the Court of learned All the said six accused were tried by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge (Ad hoc), Fast Track Court, Faridkot Additional Sessions Judge (Ad hoc ), Fast Track Court, Faridkot. Vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 12.08.2004, learned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated Additional Sessions Judge while convicting and sentencing two of the Additional Sessions Judge while convicting Additional Sessions Judge while convicting accused, namely, Nirmal Singh and Shamsher Singh to undergo rigorous accused, namely, Nirmal Singh and Shamsher Singh accused, namely, Nirmal Singh and Shamsher Singh imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each for an imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/ imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/ , acquitted the remaining accused, namely, offence under Section 307 IPC, acquitted the remaining accused, namely, offence under Section 307 IPC Gurdev Singh (since expired), Kewal Singh, Ajit Singh Gurdev Singh , Kewal Singh, Ajit Singh (since expired) e charges framed against them. and Jassan Singh of all the charges framed against them. and Jassan Singh VIMAL KUMAR 2025.01.29 12:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M); CRR-693-2005 (O&M) CRA-S-1746-SB-2004 (O&M); 2004 (O&M); 2004 (O&M); CRA-S-2058-SB-2004 (O&M) 2005 (O&M) & CRA-S-254-SB-2005 (O&M) & 2004 CRM-A-551-MA-2004 ( 4 ) 3. As noticed above, the accused, who were convicted, namely, As noticed above, t he accused, who were convicted, namely, Nirmal Singh and Shamsher Singh filed separate appeals i.e. CRA-S-1746-SB- Singh and Shamsher Singh filed separate appeals Singh and Shamsher Singh filed separate appeals 2004 2004 2004 and CRA-S-2058-SB-2004 and CRA respectively respectively challenging their conviction, whereas the State has filed two separate appeals i.e. CRA-S- whereas the State has filed two separate appeals i.e. 2005 seeking enhancement of sentence as imposed upon two 254-SB-2005 seeking enhancement of sentence as imposed upon two 2005 seeking enhancement of sentence as imposed upon two convicts/accused, namely, Nirmal Singh and Shamsher Singh and CRM- convicts/accused, namely, Nirmal Singh and Shamsher Singh and CRM convicts/accused, namely, Nirmal Singh and Shamsher Singh and CRM A-551-MA- 2004 seeking setting aside of acquittal of the remaining four -2004 seeking setting aside of acquittal of the remaining Gurdev Singh (since expired), Kewal Singh, Ajit Singh accused, namely, Gurdev Singh (since expired), Kewal Singh, Ajit Singh accused, namely, (since expired) and Jassan Singh. Victim (since expired) and Jassan Singh. Victim – Karam Singh has also preferred a separate revision petition preferred a separate revision petition preferred a separate revision petition i.e. CRR-693-2005 seeking i.e. CRR i.e. CRR enhancement of sentence as imposed upon two accused, namely, Nirmal enhancement of sentence as imposed upon two accus enhancement of sentence as imposed upon two accus Singh and Shamsher Singh and also seeking conviction of the remaining Singh and Shamsher Singh and also seeking conviction of the remaining Singh and Shamsher Singh and also seeking conviction of the remaining four accused, who have been acquitted by the trial Court. four accused, who have been acquitted by the trial Court. four accused, who have been acquitted by the trial Court. 4. It may here be mentioned that Gurdev Singh and Ajit Singh (respondents ere be mentioned that Gurdev Singh and Ajit Singh (respondents No.3 and 5 in CRR-693-2005) were re No.3 and 5 in CRR 2005) were reported to have expired and stand abated vide order dated consequently, proceedings qua them stand abated vide order dated consequently, proceedings qua them 10.12.2024. 10.12.2024. 5. During the pendency of aforesaid appeals/revision, the parties have During the pendency of aforesaid appeals/revision, the parties have During the pendency of aforesaid appeals/revision, the parties have entered into a compromise. By way of CRM entered into a compromise. CRM-2203-2025 in CRA-S-2058- SB-2004, the , the applicant/appellant seeks permission permission to place on record , which is also listed today itself compromise deeds dated 29.07.2024, which is also listed today itself compromise deed along with main appeals/revision he said compromise deeds are with main appeals/revision. Since the said compromise deeds are not disputed by learned counsel representing the injured/victim, the same not disputed by learned counsel representing the injured/victim, the same not disputed by learned counsel representing the injured/victim, the same VIMAL KUMAR 2025.01.29 12:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M); CRR-693-2005 (O&M) CRA-S-1746-SB-2004 (O&M); 2004 (O&M); 2004 (O&M); CRA-S-2058-SB-2004 (O&M) 2005 (O&M) & CRA-S-254-SB-2005 (O&M) & 2004 CRM-A-551-MA-2004 ( 5 ) are taken on record as Annexure A-1 (collectively). are taken on record as Annexure A 1 (collectively). The details of the compromise deeds are as under: compromise deed (i) Compromise deed effected between complainant Compromise deed effected between complainant - Akatar Singh (Ikattar Shamsher Singh (convict), Nirmal Singh (convict), Kewal Singh) AND Shamsher Singh (convict), Nirmal Singh (convict), Kewal Singh) Singh, wherein it is specifically recorded that the Singh and Jassan Singh, wherein it is specifically recorded that the Singh and Jassan parties have amicably resolved their issues with the intervention of parties have amicably resolved their issues with the intervention of parties have amicably resolved their issues with the intervention of relatives and respectable and that they have no objection if the entire relatives and respectable and that they have no objection if the entire relatives and respectable and that they have no objection if the entire proceedings are quashed on the basis of compromise. proceedings are quashed on the basis of compromise. proceedings are quashed on the basis of compromise. (ii) Comp Compromise deed effected between injured romise deed effected between injured/victim – Daljit Singh AND Shamsher Singh (convict), Nirmal Singh (convict), Kewal Singh and Shamsher Singh (convict), Nirmal Singh (convict), Kewal Singh and Shamsher Singh (convict), Nirmal Singh (convict), Kewal Singh and Jassan Singh, wherein it is specifically recorded that the parties have Jassan Singh, wherein it is specifically recorded that the parties have Jassan Singh, wherein it is specifically recorded that the parties have amicably resolved their issues with the intervention of relatives and amicably resolved their issues with the intervention of amicably resolved their issues with the intervention of respectable and that they have no objection if the entire proceedings are respectable and that they have no objection if the entire proceedings are respectable and that they have no objection if the entire proceedings are quashed on the basis of compromise. quashed on the basis of compromise. Compromise deed effected between injured/victim – Karnail Singh AND Compromise deed effected between injured (iii) Compromise deed effected between injured Shamsher Singh (convict), Nirmal Singh (convict), Kewal Singh and Shamsher Singh (convict), Nirmal Singh (convict), Kewal Shamsher Singh (convict), Nirmal Singh (convict), Kewal Jassan Singh, wherein it is specifically recorded that the parties have Jassan Singh, wherein it is specifically recorded that the parties have Jassan Singh, wherein it is specifically recorded that the parties have amicably resolved their issues with the intervention of relatives and amicably resolved their issues with the intervention of relatives and amicably resolved their issues with the intervention of relatives and respectable and that they have no objection if the entire proceedings are respectable and that they have no objection if the entire proceedings are respectable and that they have no objection if the entire proceedings are quashed on the basis of compromise. quashed on the basis of compro (iv) Compromise deed effected between Compromise deed effected between Gurjant Singh, son of injured Gurjant Singh, son of injured/victim – Karam Singh Karam Singh (petitioner in CRR-693 693-2005) AND Shamsher Singh (convict), Nirmal Singh (convict), Kewal Singh and Jassan Singh, (convict), Nirmal Singh (convict), Kewal Singh and Jassan (convict), Nirmal Singh (convict), Kewal Singh and Jassan wherein it is specifically recorded that the parties have amicably resolved wherein it is specifically recorded that the parties have amicably resolved wherein it is specifically recorded that the parties have amicably resolved their issues with the intervention of relatives and respectable and that their issues with the intervention of relatives and respectable and that their issues with the intervention of relatives and respectable and that they have no objection if the entire proceedings are quashed on the basis they have no objection if the entire proceedings are quashed on the basis they have no objection if the entire proceedings are quashed on the basis of compromise. of compromise. 6. Hon’ble the Supreme Court in a judgment reported as Hon’ble the Supreme Court in a judgment reported as Ishwar Singh Vs.