Crl. Revision No.751 of 2005 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No.751 of 2005 Date of Decision: March 26, 2010 Ram Murti ........Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .......Respondent ****** CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. R.S. Mamli, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Y.P. Malik, DAG, Haryana. SABINA, J. The petitioner was convicted for an offence under Section 326 IPC by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Fatehabad vide judgment dated 23.08.2003. Vide order dated 25.8.2003 the petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay fine of Rs.700/- under Section 326 IPC. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad vide judgment dated 3.3.2005. Hence, the present revision petition. The prosecution story in brief as noticed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in para 2 of the impugned judgment reads as under :- “ On 2.1.1994, ASI Lakhbir Singh, on receiving information regarding the admission of an injured in the Civil Hospital, Bhattu, reached Civil Hospital, Bhattu and Crl. Revision No.751 of 2005 2 obtained the opinion of the doctor regarding the fitness of the injured Krishan Lal who was declared unfit to make the statement. On the next day. i.e. 03.01.2004, injured was declared fit to make the statement. Accordingly, ASI Lakhbir Singh recorded the statement of the injured- complainant Krishan Lal son of Shanker, who in his statement inter-alia alleged that on 02.01.1994, his brother- in-law Norang Lal came to his house to see him and at around 5.00 p.m. he alongwith his brother-in-law was taking tea, when appellant-accused Ram Murti came in the street and started abusing him. On this, when he alongwith his brother-in-law came out in the street, the appellant- accused, who was having Kassi, in his hand gave a Kassi blow, which hit on his forehead, as a result, he fell down. On seeing this, his brother-in-law raised alarm, on which appellant-accused Ram Murti escaped from the spot alongwith Kassi.” During the course of argument, learned Counsel for the petitioner has not challenged the conviction of the petitioner under Section 326 IPC. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner be reduced to already undergone by him. The occurrence in this case has taken place in the year 1994 and the petitioner is facing criminal proceedings since then. As per the Custody Certificate, placed on record by the State Counsel, petitioner has undergone 4 months and 22 days of actual sentence. Keeping in view the submissions made by the learned Counsel for Crl. Revision No.751 of 2005 3 the petitioner, it is a fit case where the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner is liable to be reduced to already undergone by him and the sentence qua fine is liable to be enhanced. Accordingly, the conviction of the petitioner under Section 326 of IPC is maintained. However, the sentence qua imprisonment of the petitioner is reduced to already undergone by him. The fine as imposed by the Courts' below is enhanced by Rs.20,000/-. The petitioner is directed to deposit the enhanced fine of Rs.20,000/- within two months from today and the said amount be released to the injured-complainant forthwith as compensation qua injury suffered by him. In case the amount of additional fine of Rs.20,000/- is not deposited within two months from today by the petitioner, this petition shall stand dismissed. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. (SABINA) March 26, 2010 JUDGE Anand