IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 204 1. CRR-1110-2007 Date of decision: 24.09.2025 Punjab Singh .....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent 2. CRR-1075-2007 Date of decision: 24.09.2025 Gurdit Singh .....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent 3. CRR-258-2008 Date of decision: 24.09.2025 Sucha Singh and another .....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present : Mr. Ashwani Verma, Advocate for the petitioners in CRR-1110-2007 & CRR-1075-2007. Mr. Ishan Thakur, Advocate for Mr. L.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner in CRR-258-2008. Mr. Amit Rana, Sr. DAG, Punjab. **** MANJARI NEHRU KAUL , J. 1. The above referred Criminal Revisions arise from the judgement of conviction/order of sentence dated 19.07.2002 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mansa, as affirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mansa, vide judgement dated 24.02.2007, whereby the petitioners were convicted and sentenced, in case FIR VINAY 2025.09.25 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRR-1110-2007 & connected matters -2- No.41 dated 28.05.1996 under Sections 326/324/323/148/149 of IPC, registered at Police Station Sardulgarh, as follows : Name of the convict Offence(s) under Section Period of sentence Fine imposed Period of sentence in default of payment of fine Punjab Singh 326 IPC SI for 03 years Rs.500/- SI for 06 months 143 IPC SI for 03 months Rs.100/- SI for 15 days Gurdit Singh 324 IPC SI for 1 ½ years Rs.500/- SI for 02 months 143 IPC SI for 03 months Rs.100/- SI for 15 days Sucha Singh 324 IPC SI for 1 ½ years Rs.500/- SI for 02 months 143 IPC SI for 03 months Rs.100/- SI for 15 days Balbir Singh 324 IPC SI for 1 ½ years Rs.500/- SI for 02 months 143 IPC SI for 03 months Rs.100/- SI for 15 days 1A. However, the learned Appellate Court converted the imprisonment imposed upon the petitioner from simple imprisonment to rigorous imprisonment. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners have, at the very outset, fairly conceded that in view of the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the learned Trial Court and learned Appellate Court, they do not intend to assail the conviction of the petitioners on merits. Their submission is confined solely to the quantum of sentence. It is urged that the incident pertains to the year 1996, and petitioner-Punjab Singh has already undergone incarceration of more than 08 months, petitioner-Gurdit Singh has undergone incarceration of more than 05 months and petitioners Sucha Singh and Balbir Singh have already undergone incarceration of more than 11 months. It is further submitted VINAY 2025.09.25 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRR-1110-2007 & connected matters -3- that the petitioners have endured the ordeal of protracted criminal proceedings, are peace-loving and law-abiding citizens, and have no other criminal antecedents. On these premises, learned counsel plead for a lenient view, contending that no useful purpose would be served by subjecting the petitioners to further incarceration. 3. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for reduction of sentence while drawing attention to the concurrent findings recorded against the petitioners, it has been submitted that the conviction calls for no interference. However, the learned State counsel is unable to dispute that subsequent to the incident of the year 1996, the petitioners have maintained good conduct and have not been involved in any other criminal activity. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material on record. 5. In the considered view of this Court, having regard to the facts enumerated hereinabove, particularly the circumstance that the incident is of the year 1996, and taking note of the fact—undisputed by the learned State counsel, that the petitioners have not indulged in any other criminal act thereafter and has otherwise been leading a disciplined and law-abiding life, it would not be appropriate to send them back to prison at this stage of life, especially when they have already borne the brunt of prolonged trial proceedings. 6. In the totality of circumstances, ends of justice would be adequately met if, while upholding the conviction of the petitioners, their substantive sentence of rigorous imprisonment is reduced to the VINAY 2025.09.25 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRR-1110-2007 & connected matters -4- period already undergone by them. 7. Ordered accordingly. 8. With the aforesaid modification in the quantum of sentence, all the revision petitions stand disposed of accordingly. 9. A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of other connected cases. 24.09.2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Vinay JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VINAY 2025.09.25 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment