CRR-788-2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND 124 Jagroop Singh State of Haryana CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- MANISHA BATRA, J. 1. conviction and order on quantum of sentence, both dated the Court of learned State vs. Jagroop Singh and 03.05.2013, registered under Sections 148, 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 149 of the IPC at Police Station Pehowa, accused, the under Sections 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo well as against the judgment dated Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, conviction passed by the learned trial Court was upheld dismissed. 2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Jagroop Singh and another Versus Haryana CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. Sanjiv Kumar Aggarwal, Advocate and Mr. Ojas Bansal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Apoorv Garg, Addl. A.G., MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) The present revision petition has been filed against the judgment and order on quantum of sentence, both dated the Court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, State vs. Jagroop Singh and others, arising 03.05.2013, registered under Sections 148, 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 149 of the IPC at Police Station Pehowa, the petitioners were held guilty for commission of offence Sections 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for maximum well as against the judgment dated 27.02.2025 Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, whereby the conviction passed by the learned trial Court was upheld -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR-788-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 07.07.2025 ...Petitioner Versus ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Sanjiv Kumar Aggarwal, Advocate and , Haryana. petition has been filed against the judgment and order on quantum of sentence, both dated 19.09.2018, passed by Judicial Magistrate, Pehowa in case titled as , arising out of FIR No. 131 dated 03.05.2013, registered under Sections 148, 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 149 of the IPC at Police Station Pehowa, whereby, while acquitting the co held guilty for commission of offences punishable Sections 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 34 of IPC and imprisonment for maximum 03 years with fine; as 27.02.2025, passed by the Court of learned whereby the aforesaid judgment of conviction passed by the learned trial Court was upheld and the appeal was 2025 (O&M) 07.07.2025 ...Petitioners ...Respondent petition has been filed against the judgment of passed by titled as out of FIR No. 131 dated 03.05.2013, registered under Sections 148, 323, 324 and 326 read with Section , while acquitting the co- punishable Sections 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 34 of IPC and were with fine; as he Court of learned aforesaid judgment of and the appeal was MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.07.07 17:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-788-2025 (O&M) 2. as not to press the learned Court. Learned counsel confines his prayer against the order of sentence only. It is further su other case is pending against sentence of the petitioner him. 3. prayer. He has filed custody certificate has already undergone actual sentence of petitioner Subhash has undergone actual sentence of 05 mont of total sentence of the learned appellate Court and 4. conviction passed by the Courts below as the same are based on appreciation of prosecution evidence, proving guilt of the petitione fact that the already undergone case, which shows that mainstream of the society modified to the extent by them. However, the stands disposed of. 2025 (O&M) Today, learned counsel for the not to press the present revision against the judgment of conviction trial Court, as well as the judgment passed by the . Learned counsel confines his prayer against the order of sentence only. It is further submitted that the petitioners are other case is pending against them and so looking into these circumstances, the sentence of the petitioners may be reduced to the Learned State Counsel has no serious objection has filed custody certificates, as per which, petitioner already undergone actual sentence of petitioner Subhash has undergone actual sentence of 05 mont of total sentence of 03 years as awarded by the appellate Court and they are not involved in any other case. After hearing the counsel for the parties, I uphold the judgment conviction passed by the Courts below as the same are based on appreciation of prosecution evidence, proving guilt of the petitione fact that the petitioners have faced the agony of protracted trial already undergone aforementioned sentence and case, which shows that they have improved their mainstream of the society, the order on quantum of modified to the extent that the same is reduced to the period already undergone However, the fine imposed upon the stands disposed of. -2- counsel for the petitioners has made a statement so against the judgment of conviction, passed by trial Court, as well as the judgment passed by the learned appellate . Learned counsel confines his prayer against the order of sentence only. It s are not the previous convicts nor any and so looking into these circumstances, the reduced to the period already undergone by has no serious objection to the afore , as per which, petitioner Jagroop Singh already undergone actual sentence of 06 months and 27 days, whereas petitioner Subhash has undergone actual sentence of 05 months and 11 days, as awarded by the learned trial Court and upheld by not involved in any other case. After hearing the counsel for the parties, I uphold the judgment conviction passed by the Courts below as the same are based on appreciation of prosecution evidence, proving guilt of the petitioners, however, considering the faced the agony of protracted trial and they have sentence and are not involved in any other they have improved their character and have joined the on quantum of sentence dated 19.09.2018 that the same is reduced to the period already undergone fine imposed upon the petitioners is upheld. The petition has made a statement so , passed by appellate . Learned counsel confines his prayer against the order of sentence only. It nor any and so looking into these circumstances, the period already undergone by to the aforesaid Jagroop Singh , whereas hs and 11 days, out upheld by After hearing the counsel for the parties, I uphold the judgments of conviction passed by the Courts below as the same are based on appreciation of , however, considering the they have not involved in any other joined the 19.09.2018 is that the same is reduced to the period already undergone The petition MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.07.07 17:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-788-2025 (O&M) 5. if not required in any trial Court. 6. any, shall also be treated as disposed of. 07.07.2025 Waseem Ansari Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 2025 (O&M) The petitioners are directed to if not required in any other case, on depositing Since the main petition stands disposed of, pending application, if any, shall also be treated as disposed of. Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable -3- be released from custody forthwith depositing fine as imposed by the learned Since the main petition stands disposed of, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No be released from custody forthwith, learned Since the main petition stands disposed of, pending application, if MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.07.07 17:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document