CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.   of 2010  @ SLP(Crl.) 5931 of 2010                                               CORRECTED COPY   1

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1488 OF 2010 ARISING OUT SLP(CRL.) NO. 5931 OF 2010

 SANTOKH SINGH & ORS.   ..... APPELLANTS

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB   ..... RESPONDENT

O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. This is a rather unusual case and in view of  

the  long  drawn  litigation  pending  over  almost  two  

decades, the matter can be sorted out here and now.  

In view of the limited question involved, we are not  

inclined to even issue notice but proceed  to decide  

the matter at this very stage.  The five appellants  

Santokh  Singh,  Joginder  Singh,  Kala  and  Lakhwinder  

Singh  and  Kashmira  Singh  were  tried  for  offences  

punishable under Section 324/149 of the Indian Penal  

Code.  The trial court convicted and sentenced them  

as under:

Name U/S. R.I. Fine In default

Santokh Singh 326 IPC

324 IPC

148 IPC

3 years

1 year

1 year

Rs. 1000/-

Rs. 500

3 months

2 months

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.   of 2010  @ SLP(Crl.) 5931 of 2010                                               CORRECTED COPY   2

Joginder Singh 326/149 IPC

324 IPC

2 years

15 months

Rs. 1000/-

Rs. 500/-

3 months

2 months

Kashmira Singh 326/149IPC

324/149 IPC

2 years

1 year

Rs. 1000/-

Rs.  500/-

3 months  

2 months

Lakhwinder Singh 326/149 IPC

324/149 IPC

2 years

1 year

Rs. 1000/-

Rs 500/-

3 months

2 months

Kala 326/149 IPC

324/149 IPC

2 years

1 year

Rs. 1000/-

. 500/-₨ 3 months  

2 months  

3. This conviction and sentence was maintained by  

the  Sessions  Judge.   Kashmira  Singh  has  in  the  

meanwhile passed away.  Before the High Court, the  

only prayer made was for reduction in the quantum of  

sentence.  The High Court by its judgment dated 26th  

February, 2010 accordingly observed as under:

“Perusal of the record reveals that all  the  accused-petitioners  were  very  much  present armed with deadly weapons at the time  of  occurrence  and  they  have  fully  participated  in  the  occurrence  and  as  such  provision  of  Section  149  IPC  were  fully  attracted in this case.  Keeping in view the  fact that petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 were aged  51 and 66 years while petitioner Nos. 4 and 5  were the age group of 31 years and 28 years  respectively  at  the  time  of  commission  of  offence and occurrence pertains tot he year  1993  and  sword  of  damocles  has  remained  hanging over the head of petitioners for the  last 17 years, I am of the considered opinion  that ends of justice will be adequately met,  if the sentence awarded to the petitioners is  reduced from 3 years R.I. To 2 years R.I.  Sentence  of  fine  and  default  clause  will  remain same.  I order accordingly.        With the above modification in the  impugned  sentence  order,  this  revision  petition is disposed of.”

4. Before  us,  today  the  learned  counsel  for  the

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.   of 2010  @ SLP(Crl.) 5931 of 2010                                               CORRECTED COPY   3

appellant has made only one submission.  He has pointed  

out that the sentence awarded to the appellants had  

been reduced from three years rigorous imprisonment to  

two years but it appeared that the High Court had, by  

an  inadvertent  error  confined  the  relief  only  to  

Santokh Singh and not to the other three appellants  

whose  sentence  was  already  two  years  rigorous  

imprisonment. The trial court and the Sessions Court  

had drawn a distinction in the award of sentence as  

Santokh Singh had been convicted under section 326 IPC  

simplictor  and  the  other  accused  with  the  aid  of  

Ssection  149.  We  see  merit  in  the  argument.    We,  

accordingly, allow the appeal to the extent that the  

sentence of Joginder Singh, Lakhwinder Singh and Kala  

will stand reduced from two years to one year's R.I.  

under Section 326/149 of the IPC, the other parts of  

the sentence being maintained as it is.

5. The  appeal  is  disposed  of  with  the  above  

directions.

   ......................J  [HARJIT SINGH BEDI]

......................J    [C.K. PRASAD]

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.   of 2010  @ SLP(Crl.) 5931 of 2010                                               CORRECTED COPY   4

NEW DELHI AUGUST 02, 2010.