Crl.A.Nos. @ SLP(Crl.) D.No.13225 of 2020 1
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.550-554 OF 2020
(Arising out of S.L.P (Crl.)Nos.4016-4020 of 2020
D.No.13225/2020
Dalbir Singh ...Appellant
Versus
State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.etc. ...Respondents
O R D E R
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. These criminal appeals are filed by the
complainant, aggrieved by the common order dated
09.12.2019 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New
Delhi in Crl.A.No.537 of 2019, Crl.A.No.624 of 2019,
Crl.A.No.622 of 2019, Crl.A.No.488 of 2019 and
Crl.A.No.499 of 2019, in rejecting the claim made by the
appellant herein for release of compensation which is
awarded under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C., in order dated
20.03.2019 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge,
Crl.A.Nos. @ SLP(Crl.) D.No.13225 of 2020 2
FTC Court,Shahdara in Sessions Case No.29 of 2011 and
Unique Case ID No.235 of 2016.
4. The contesting respondents, herein were accused in
FIR No.1004/2006 registered on the file of PS, Sector20, Noida (U.P.) for offence under Sections
342/332/306/167/218/220/302/34 IPC. All of them are
members of police force. It was the case of the
appellant/complainant that, respondents-accused have
illegally detained his son in connection with a theft
case and he was tortured in the police lock up and in
view of the injuries suffered, he succumbed to the
injuries. The respondents-accused were tried by the
learned Addl. Sessions Judge, FTC court, Shahdara for
the offences alleged against them and by judgment dated
14.03.2019, the respondents-accused namely Kunwar Pal is
held guilty for offence punishable under Section 365/34
IPC and accused SI Hindveer Singh and SI Mahesh Mishra
and constable Pradeep, constable Pushpender and
constable Haripal were held guilty for offence
punishable under Sections 365/220/167/304/34 IPC. While
passing the order of sentence on 20.03.2019, the Trial
Court has awarded compensation of Rs.One lac payable by
the accused/convict Kunwar Pal and a sum of Rs.Five lacs
each was ordered to be paid by the accused/convicts SI
Crl.A.Nos. @ SLP(Crl.) D.No.13225 of 2020 3
Hindveer Singh and SI Mahesh Mishra and a sum of Rs.Two
lacs each was ordered to be paid by the accused/convicts
constable Pradeep, constable Pushpender and constable
Haripal, in terms of Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. The Trial
Court ordered release of such compensation in favour of
the appellant who is the father of the deceased victim.
5. As against the conviction recorded and sentence
imposed by the Trial Court, criminal appeals are
preferred in Crl.A.No.537 of 2019, Crl.A.No.624 of 2019,
Crl.A.No.622 of 2019, Crl.A.No.488 of 2019 and
Crl.A.No.499 of 2019 by the accused, and same are
pending before the High Court.
6. By the time impugned order came to be passed on
9.12.2019, the appellants in Crl.A.No.488 of 2019,
Crl.A.No.499 of 2019, Crl.A.No.622 of 2019 and
Crl.A.no.624 of 2019 have deposited the fine and
compensation amount, whereas the appellant in
Crl.A.No.537 of 2019 sought time to deposit the same.
In view of the deposit made by the appellants, the
appellant herein made a request to release the deposited
compensation amount to him as, he is the father of the
deceased victim. Such request for release of the amount
as prayed by the appellant, is rejected vide impugned
order dated 9.12.2019. Hence these appeals.
Crl.A.Nos. @ SLP(Crl.) D.No.13225 of 2020 4
7. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and
learned counsel appearing for respondent-State. Learned
counsel Sri Divyesh Pratap Singh, appearing for the
appellant, has submitted that the son of the appellant
is the victim of custodial torture, who has succumbed to
injuries suffered in lock up. It is stated that the
appellant is about 76 years of age and has been fighting
alone this case for the last more than 14 years.
Further he has, stated that on account of the
unfortunate incident, appellant has lost his son at the
young age of 20 years and further the appellant has
spent more than 14 years for pursuing the case, which
resulted in deterioration of his mental and physical
health. By further referring to material placed on
record, it is submitted that the appellant is suffering
from serious ailments and is in dire need of money for
his medical needs, and inspite of the same, the High
Court has refused to release the compensation awarded to
the appellant.
8. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for
the respondents has submitted that the judgment of the
Trial Court dated 14.03.2019 convicting the respondents
and further the order dated 20.03.2019 imposing sentence
and award of compensation, are the subject matter of
Crl.A.Nos. @ SLP(Crl.) D.No.13225 of 2020 5
challenge in the appeals, as such the appellant is not
entitled for release of, such compensation, during the
pendency of the appeals before the High Court.
9. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and
learned counsel appearing for respondent-State, we have
perused the impugned order and other material placed on
record.
10. In view of the pendency of criminal appeals before
the High Court, wherein the respondents-accused have
challenged their conviction and sentence imposed, we do
not wish to record any finding on merits of the matter.
But suffice it to say, that the compensation awarded in
the order dated 20.03.2019 is in exercise of power under
Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. 1973 and as the order dated
20.03.2019 is under challenge in criminal appeals
pending before the High Court, we are of the considered
view that it is not desirable to release such
compensation in favour of the appellant, at this stage.
It is true that, the incident has happened in the year
2006 and the appellant herein who is the father of the
victim is relentlessly pursuing the matter from last
more than a decade. But at the same time it is to be
kept in mind that, the conviction recorded and sentence
imposed by the Trial Court is the subject matter of the
Crl.A.Nos. @ SLP(Crl.) D.No.13225 of 2020 6
appeals, pending before the High Court. If we permit
the release of such compensation to the appellant at
this stage, it may lead to multiplicity of proceedings.
Instead of ordering release of compensation to the
appellant at this stage, we deem it appropriate to
request the High Court for expeditious disposal of
Criminal Appeal Nos. 537 of 2019, 624 of 2019, 622 of
2019, 488 of 2019 and 499 of 2019.
11. For the aforesaid reasons, we decline to interfere
with the impugned order dated 09.12.2019 passed by the
High Court and we request the High Court to dispose of
Criminal Appeal Nos. 537 of 2019, 624 of 2019, 622 of
2019, 488 of 2019 and 499 of 2019 as expeditiously as
possible, preferably within a period of six months, from
the date of this order. The appeals are accordingly
dismissed.
...................J
[Ashok Bhushan]
...................J.
[R. Subhash Reddy]
New Delhi;
August 28, 2020
