CRR-1608-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 225 Joginder Pal and another State of Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Present: Mr. Mr. Pankaj Bhardwaj, Advocate Mr. AMAN CHAUDHARY, J 1. The present against the judgment dated Patiala, affirming the judgment/order of conviction by trial Court on whereby they were Section 420 IPC 465 & 471 IPC 467 IPC 468 IPC 120-B IPC All the sentences shall run concurrently. 2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts are that connivance with other accused, Pritam Kaur widow of Arjan Singh, who was dharam sister of complainant’s mother, dated 15.06.1997, valid Will dated 17.06.1997 after which an enquiry was conducted and an FIR was registered under Section 420/465/468/471/120 12 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR Date of decision : Joginder Pal and another Versus HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Mr. SS Narula, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Pankaj Bhardwaj, Advocate for the Mr. Jasjit Singh, DAG, Punjab. AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral) The present revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the judgment dated 16.05.2012, passed by the Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, , affirming the judgment/order of conviction by trial Court on they were convicted and sentenced to undergo Imprisonment Fine RI for 2 years Rs.2000/ 465 & 471 IPC RI for 2 years - RI for 2 years Rs.2000/ RI for 2 years Rs.2000/ RI for 2 years - All the sentences shall run concurrently. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts are that connivance with other accused, had prepared Pritam Kaur widow of Arjan Singh, who was dharam sister of complainant’s mother, dated 15.06.1997, to grab her house, in fact, she valid Will dated 17.06.1997 in favour of his mother. after which an enquiry was conducted and an FIR was registered under Section 420/465/468/471/120-B. -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR-1608-2012 (O&M) Date of decision : 21.11.2025 .....Petitioners ..... Respondent HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY for the petitioners. revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner , passed by the Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, , affirming the judgment/order of conviction by trial Court on 07.06.2010 ced to undergo as under:- In default Rs.2000/- each SI for one month - Rs.2000/- each SI for one month Rs.2000/- each SI for one month - All the sentences shall run concurrently. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts are that accused-petitioners the forged and fabricated Will of Pritam Kaur widow of Arjan Singh, who was dharam sister of complainant’s in fact, she had executed a legal and in favour of his mother. Thus, a complaint was filed, after which an enquiry was conducted and an FIR was registered under Section revision petition has been preferred by the petitioners , passed by the Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, 07.06.2010, SI for one month SI for one month one month petitioners in the forged and fabricated Will of Pritam Kaur widow of Arjan Singh, who was dharam sister of complainant’s executed a legal and laint was filed, after which an enquiry was conducted and an FIR was registered under Sections PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.11.22 14:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRR-1608-2012 3. After completion of investigation, final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was presented in the Court against the accused prima facie case, charges under Section framed against them 4. The prosecution, in support of its version, examined Thereafter, the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. The incriminating evidence was put to innocence and alleging false implication. 5. The learned trial Court after hearing the lea parties, convicted and sentenced the accused further affirmed by the learned Appellate Court 6. Aggrieved 7. Learned counsel for challenge to the conviction and prays for reducing the sentence awarded to the petitioners to the period already undergone, it being 15 days, respectively to the poor strata of the society; sole breadwinner of any other cases agony of protracted trial for the last 8. Learned State counsel opposes on the ground that appreciating the evidence led by the prosecution, has rightly convicted and sentenced the petitioner He, however, affirms case and the period undergone by 9. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused 10. Evidently, 12 (O&M) After completion of investigation, final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was presented in the Court against the accused cie case, charges under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120 them, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution, in support of its version, examined Thereafter, the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. The incriminating evidence was put to them innocence and alleging false implication. The learned trial Court after hearing the lea parties, convicted and sentenced the accused-petitioner further affirmed by the learned Appellate Court Aggrieved petitioners are before this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner challenge to the conviction and prays for reducing the sentence awarded to the to the period already undergone, it being , respectively, on the ground that they are to the poor strata of the society; sole breadwinner of any other cases; never misused the concession of bail and agony of protracted trial for the last 27 years. Learned State counsel opposes on the ground that appreciating the evidence led by the prosecution, has rightly convicted and petitioners, therefore, prays for the dismissal of the present He, however, affirms the non-involvement of the the period undergone by them as per the custody certificate Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused Evidently, PW3-Nand Lal, complainant, had specifically -2- After completion of investigation, final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was presented in the Court against the accused-petitioners. On finding a 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC were pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution, in support of its version, examined 7 witnesses. Thereafter, the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. them, which they denied, pleading The learned trial Court after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners as noticed above, which in an appeal preferred by them. before this Court. petitioners, at the very outset, gives up challenge to the conviction and prays for reducing the sentence awarded to the to the period already undergone, it being 2 months 14 days & 2 months, are aged and first offenders; belong to the poor strata of the society; sole breadwinner of their families; not involved in ; never misused the concession of bail and have been facing the Learned State counsel opposes on the ground that the trial Court after appreciating the evidence led by the prosecution, has rightly convicted and , therefore, prays for the dismissal of the present petition involvement of the petitioners in any other criminal as per the custody certificates. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the record. Nand Lal, complainant, had specifically named After completion of investigation, final report under Section 173 On finding a were witnesses. Thereafter, the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. denied, pleading rned counsel for the as noticed above, which , at the very outset, gives up challenge to the conviction and prays for reducing the sentence awarded to the days & 2 months, belong not involved in been facing the the trial Court after appreciating the evidence led by the prosecution, has rightly convicted and petition. in any other criminal named the PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.11.22 14:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRR-1608-2012 petitioners for the alleged cheating and forgery which duly proved against them during investigation as deposed by PW5 also by report of the Forensic Science La which reported the signature on Will dated 15.06.1997 was the result of forgery. going through the evidence on record, the prosecution has proved th them. Thus, there is no scope for interference in conclusion arrived at by the 11. This Court in 1134-2017 decided on 19.07.2017, wherein the accused was convicted under Sections 379, 411, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, reduced the sentence of one year to 10 months, by considering that the petitioner was facing trial since 2010. Similarly in Jaggar Singh and another vs. State of Punjab, 15.05.2023, the substan convicted under Sections 420, 465, 467, 471 IPC for RI of 3 and 2 years respectively, was reduced to the extent of already undergone, while observing that the offence was committed in 1999 and the a good-conduct since then. 12. In Satish vs. State of U.P., Court had observed that, “Whilst it is undoubtedly true that society has a right to lead a peaceful and fearless life, without free roaming criminals creating havoc in the lives of ordinary peace loving citizens. But reformative theory which propounds that a civilized society cannot be achieved only through punitive attitudes and vindictiveness; and that instead public harmony, brotherhood and mutual acceptability ought to be fostere time offenders ought to be liberally accorded a chance to repent their past and look 12 (O&M) the alleged cheating and forgery which duly proved against them during investigation as deposed by PW5-ASI Mehar Singh, Investigation Officer as also by report of the Forensic Science Laboratory, Punjab, Chandigarh, Ex.PW7/A, which reported the signature on Will dated 15.06.1997 was the result of forgery. going through the evidence on record, the prosecution has proved th . Thus, there is no scope for interference in conclusion arrived at by the Courts below. As such, This Court in Parminder Singh @ Kala vs. State of Punjab 2017 decided on 19.07.2017, wherein the accused was convicted under 79, 411, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, reduced the sentence of one year to 10 months, by considering that the petitioner was facing trial since 2010. Similarly Jaggar Singh and another vs. State of Punjab, 15.05.2023, the substantive sentence awarded to the accused convicted under Sections 420, 465, 467, 471 IPC for RI of 3 and 2 years respectively, was reduced to the extent of already undergone, while observing that the offence was committed in 1999 and the a conduct since then. Satish vs. State of U.P., (2021) 14 SCC 580, Hon’ble the Supreme Court had observed that, “Whilst it is undoubtedly true that society has a right to lead a peaceful and fearless life, without free roaming criminals creating havoc in the lives of ordinary peace loving citizens. But reformative theory which propounds that a civilized society cannot be achieved only through punitive attitudes and vindictiveness; and that instead public harmony, brotherhood and mutual acceptability ought to be fostere time offenders ought to be liberally accorded a chance to repent their past and look -3- the alleged cheating and forgery which duly proved against them ASI Mehar Singh, Investigation Officer as boratory, Punjab, Chandigarh, Ex.PW7/A, which reported the signature on Will dated 15.06.1997 was the result of forgery. going through the evidence on record, the prosecution has proved the case against . Thus, there is no scope for interference in the findings recorded and . As such, their conviction is upheld. Parminder Singh @ Kala vs. State of Punjab, CRR 2017 decided on 19.07.2017, wherein the accused was convicted under 79, 411, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, reduced the sentence of one year to 10 months, by considering that the petitioner was facing trial since 2010. Similarly Jaggar Singh and another vs. State of Punjab, CRR-1306-2009, decided on tive sentence awarded to the accused-appellants, who were convicted under Sections 420, 465, 467, 471 IPC for RI of 3 and 2 years respectively, was reduced to the extent of already undergone, while observing that the offence was committed in 1999 and the accused-appellants have maintained (2021) 14 SCC 580, Hon’ble the Supreme Court had observed that, “Whilst it is undoubtedly true that society has a right to lead a peaceful and fearless life, without free roaming criminals creating havoc in the lives of ordinary peace loving citizens. But equally strong is the foundation of reformative theory which propounds that a civilized society cannot be achieved only through punitive attitudes and vindictiveness; and that instead public harmony, brotherhood and mutual acceptability ought to be fostered. Thus, first time offenders ought to be liberally accorded a chance to repent their past and look the alleged cheating and forgery which duly proved against them ASI Mehar Singh, Investigation Officer as boratory, Punjab, Chandigarh, Ex.PW7/A, which reported the signature on Will dated 15.06.1997 was the result of forgery. On e case against the findings recorded and , CRR- 2017 decided on 19.07.2017, wherein the accused was convicted under 79, 411, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, reduced the sentence of one year to 10 months, by considering that the petitioner was facing trial since 2010. Similarly 2009, decided on appellants, who were convicted under Sections 420, 465, 467, 471 IPC for RI of 3 and 2 years respectively, was reduced to the extent of already undergone, while observing that appellants have maintained (2021) 14 SCC 580, Hon’ble the Supreme Court had observed that, “Whilst it is undoubtedly true that society has a right to lead a peaceful and fearless life, without free roaming criminals creating havoc in equally strong is the foundation of reformative theory which propounds that a civilized society cannot be achieved only through punitive attitudes and vindictiveness; and that instead public d. Thus, first time offenders ought to be liberally accorded a chance to repent their past and look PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.11.22 14:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRR-1608-2012 forward to a bright future. [ 1981 SCC (Cri) 112]”. 13. In Babu Lal and another vs. State of Rajasthan, of 2003, decided on 01.05.2024, Rajasthan High Court keeping in view that the occurrence took place in 1989 and the accused out of total sentence of 2 years S.I, partly allowed the appeal by reducing the same to the foregoing period. 2795-2009, decided on 19.03.2025, a case of conviction under Sections 420, 465, 468, 416, 417 and 120 that the accused is 88 years; first time offender of justice and reduced the 14. Hon’ble The Supreme Court Officer, Tamil Nadu, reduced the sentence to the period already undergone by the appellant wherein she was convicted under under Sections 420 read with Section 511 IPC an 193 IPC read with Section 136 of Income Tax Act, 1961, by taking into account that she was aged 52 years and had children as also that the matter was 25 years old. 15. Further 15 SCC 572, the appellant was convicted under Section 420 and 120B IPC for 5 and 3 years of RI respectively along with fine of Rs. 1 lac and Rs. 50,000/ sentence to the period of 248 days already undergone, observing that he was 70 years old, undergoi lingering for 3 decades and in Investigation Through Gyanendra P.D. Singh 12 (O&M) forward to a bright future. [Maru Ram v. Union of India 1981 SCC (Cri) 112]”. Babu Lal and another vs. State of Rajasthan, of 2003, decided on 01.05.2024, Rajasthan High Court keeping in view that the occurrence took place in 1989 and the accused out of total sentence of 2 years S.I, partly allowed the appeal by reducing the same o the foregoing period. Similarly in Sanwal Ram vs. State of Haryana 2009, decided on 19.03.2025, a case of conviction under Sections 420, 465, 468, 416, 417 and 120-B IPC, this Court, in consideration of the circumstances that the accused is 88 years old, and had undergone 3 months 6 days out of 2 years; first time offender; no antecedents, took a lenient view furthering the cause reduced the sentence to the period already undergone. Hon’ble The Supreme Court in Officer, Tamil Nadu, Criminal Appeal no.969 of 2000 decided on 01.04.2008, reduced the sentence to the period already undergone by the appellant wherein she was convicted under under Sections 420 read with Section 511 IPC an 193 IPC read with Section 136 of Income Tax Act, 1961, by taking into account that she was aged 52 years and had children as also that the matter was 25 years Furthermore in Edmund S. Lyngdoh vs. State of Meghalaya, 15 SCC 572, the appellant was convicted under Section 420 and 120B IPC for 5 and 3 years of RI respectively along with fine of Rs. 1 lac and Rs. 50,000/ sentence to the period of 248 days already undergone, observing that he was 70 years old, undergoing treatment, had paid the fine amount and the matter was lingering for 3 decades and in Naresh Chaubey vs. Central Bureau of Investigation Through Gyanendra P.D. Singh -4- Maru Ram v. Union of India, (1981) 1 SCC 107 : Babu Lal and another vs. State of Rajasthan, S.B. CRP No. 594 of 2003, decided on 01.05.2024, Rajasthan High Court keeping in view that the occurrence took place in 1989 and the accused-petitioner had undergone 15 days out of total sentence of 2 years S.I, partly allowed the appeal by reducing the same Sanwal Ram vs. State of Haryana, CRR 2009, decided on 19.03.2025, a case of conviction under Sections 420, 465, B IPC, this Court, in consideration of the circumstances years old, and had undergone 3 months 6 days out of 2 ; no antecedents, took a lenient view furthering the cause sentence to the period already undergone. n P. Soundarya vs. Income Tax Criminal Appeal no.969 of 2000 decided on 01.04.2008, reduced the sentence to the period already undergone by the appellant wherein she was convicted under under Sections 420 read with Section 511 IPC and Section 193 IPC read with Section 136 of Income Tax Act, 1961, by taking into account that she was aged 52 years and had children as also that the matter was 25 years Edmund S. Lyngdoh vs. State of Meghalaya, (2016) 15 SCC 572, the appellant was convicted under Section 420 and 120B IPC for 5 and 3 years of RI respectively along with fine of Rs. 1 lac and Rs. 50,000/- sentence to the period of 248 days already undergone, observing that he was 70 ng treatment, had paid the fine amount and the matter was Naresh Chaubey vs. Central Bureau of Investigation Through Gyanendra P.D. Singh, 2018(1) SCC(Cri.) 293, the , (1981) 1 SCC 107 : CRP No. 594 of 2003, decided on 01.05.2024, Rajasthan High Court keeping in view that the petitioner had undergone 15 days out of total sentence of 2 years S.I, partly allowed the appeal by reducing the same , CRR- 2009, decided on 19.03.2025, a case of conviction under Sections 420, 465, B IPC, this Court, in consideration of the circumstances years old, and had undergone 3 months 6 days out of 2 ; no antecedents, took a lenient view furthering the cause P. Soundarya vs. Income Tax had reduced the sentence to the period already undergone by the appellant wherein she d Section 193 IPC read with Section 136 of Income Tax Act, 1961, by taking into account that she was aged 52 years and had children as also that the matter was 25 years (2016) 15 SCC 572, the appellant was convicted under Section 420 and 120B IPC for 5 and sentence to the period of 248 days already undergone, observing that he was 70 ng treatment, had paid the fine amount and the matter was Naresh Chaubey vs. Central Bureau of , 2018(1) SCC(Cri.) 293, the PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.11.22 14:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRR-1608-2012 sentence of the appellant was reduced to the period of 20 m undergone out of sentence of 3 years for conviction under Sections 420, 471 read with 465 IPC, by taking into consideration that he was aged 75 years and suffering from several ailments. 16. Humanistically viewing of trial since long; successfully warded off learning of a lesson; circumstances warranting reduction discernible. Thus, it would serve the ends of justice to reduce the fine intact. 17. The order of sentence dated extent and as such, the present 21.11.2025 ashok Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 12 (O&M) sentence of the appellant was reduced to the period of 20 m undergone out of sentence of 3 years for conviction under Sections 420, 471 read with 465 IPC, by taking into consideration that he was aged 75 years and suffering from several ailments. Humanistically viewing, the petitioner of trial since long; successfully warded off learning of a lesson; their socio-economic circumstances, this Court finds ircumstances warranting reduction discernible. Thus, it would serve the ends of tice to reduce their sentence to the period already undergone, however, keeping The order of sentence dated 07.06.2010 extent and as such, the present petition stands partly allowed (AMAN CHAUDHARY) Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No -5- sentence of the appellant was reduced to the period of 20 months already undergone out of sentence of 3 years for conviction under Sections 420, 471 read with 465 IPC, by taking into consideration that he was aged 75 years and suffering petitioners having suffered the ignominy of trial since long; successfully warded off their crime-proneness-an evident economic circumstances, this Court finds ircumstances warranting reduction discernible. Thus, it would serve the ends of sentence to the period already undergone, however, keeping 07.06.2010 is modified to the aforesaid stands partly allowed. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE Yes / No : Yes / No onths already undergone out of sentence of 3 years for conviction under Sections 420, 471 read with 465 IPC, by taking into consideration that he was aged 75 years and suffering fered the ignominy an evident economic circumstances, this Court finds ircumstances warranting reduction discernible. Thus, it would serve the ends of sentence to the period already undergone, however, keeping is modified to the aforesaid PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.11.22 14:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.