HC trims jail term of 87-year-old convict to period already undergone, stresses reformative justice

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that the criminal justice system must focus on reforming offenders while balancing the interests of both the victim and the accused. The bench also made it clear that reformative measures such as admonition and probation are the preferred way forward. The assertions came as the high court reduced the sentence of an 87-year-old man to the period already undergone in a case of causing hurt.

Upholding the conviction, Justice Aman Chaudhary of the high court ordered that the sentence be curtailed to 5 months and 19 days already spent in custody, but increased the fine from Rs 1,000 to Rs 10,000, while directing that the enhanced amount be paid to the injured.

The incident dates back to August 2009. The bench was told that a dispute arose when the complainant went to his fields to irrigate them through canal water. He objected to his neighbours drawing water ahead of the allotted time, after which he was allegedly assaulted, resulting in injuries.

Laying out the broader philosophy guiding its decision, Justice Chaudhary observed: “The object of the criminal justice system is to reform the offenders and to make them see and follow the right path. However, the ancient penological approach was of custodial measure to curb crime. A balanced approach keeping in view the interests of the victim and accused and their families, release on admonition, probation, etc. is the way forward.”

The matter was placed before Justice Chaudhary following the filing of a revision petition against a 2012 judgment by Sangrur Sessions Judge, affirming the trial court’s order convicting the petitioner under Sections 326 and 324 of the IPC. The trial court had sentenced him to three years’ rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs 1,000 under Section 326, and six months’ rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs 500 under Section 324, with default sentences attached.

The counsel for the petitioner confined the challenge before the high court solely to the quantum of sentence, seeking reduction to the period already undergone. It was argued that the petitioner was a first-time offender, belonged to a poor stratum of society, was the sole breadwinner of his family, had not misused bail at any stage, and had endured the “agony of protracted trial” for over 16 years.

Accepting the plea on sentencing, the court recorded that the petitioner had already undergone a substantial part of the sentence and had maintained good conduct during the long pendency of proceedings. Taking note of the mitigating circumstances, Justice Chaudhary held: “This court finds that the ends of justice would be adequately met if the sentence of the petitioner is ordered to be reduced to the period already undergone by him.”

At the same time, the court calibrated the relief by enhancing the monetary penalty, observing: “However, keeping in view the gravity of an offence, the fine imposed upon him, be increased from Rs 1,000 to Rs 10,000 to be paid by the petitioner to the injured/complainant.”