Crl.Rev.No. 2265 of 2008 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl.Rev.No. 2265 of 2008 Date of decision: 24.3.2009 Shish Ram ......Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Atul Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** SABINA, J. Vijay, Sukhbir and Rati Ram-respondent Nos.2 to 4 were tried for an offence under Sections 323/325/34 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC for short) in FIR No.275 dated 16.12.1996 registered at Police Station Jatusana. Vide judgment and order dated 8.7.2006/10.7.2006 they were convicted and sentenced under Sections 323 /325/34 IPC by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kosli. Aggrieved by the same, respondent Nos. 2 to 4 preferred an appeal and the same was disposed of vide judgment dated 22.7.2008 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari. Conviction of respondent Nos. 2 to 4 under Sections 323/325/34 was maintained. However, their sentence qua imprisonment was set aside and they were ordered to be released on probation and they were further directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.5,000/- each to the injured. Hence, the revision petition has been filed by the complainant Shish Ram. Crl.Rev.No. 2265 of 2008 2 The case of the prosecution, as noticed by the Appellate Court in para No.2 of its judgment, is reproduced herein below:- “In brief, the facts of the prosecution case are that on 16.12.1996 Shish Ram son of Tara Chand came in the police station, Jatusana and recorded that rapat No.4 in which he alleged that on 15.12.1996 at about 4.00 p.m. he was working in his fields and digging the well. In the meantime, Madan, Vijay Singh. Rati Ram and Sukhbir approached there. Vijay, Rati Ram and Sukhbir are the brothers-in-law of his deceased brother Jai lal and came in the village one day before. They asked him that as to why he was digging the well. When the complainant said that he has a right to dig the well in his land, Rati Ram, who was having a jelly in his hand, gave its blow on his head and gave another blow on his hand. In the meantime, his sons Brahamjit and Bhoop Singh approached there. Sukhbir was having a lathi in his hand and he gave its blow on the head of his son, on which his son became unconscious. Ajit, who was having jelly in his hand, gave its blow on the head of his son Bhoop Singh. Thereafter, all the accused gave blows one after another. After hearing the noise, Ajit Singh, Chand Singh and Dinesh approached there and rescued them from the clutches of accused. On the basis of DDR No.4 dated Crl.Rev.No. 2265 of 2008 3 16.12.1996 was got registered against the accused in police station, Jatusana. During the course of investigation the challan was presented before the learned Court below.” Learned counsel for the petitioner-complainant has submitted that respondent Nos. 2 to 4 had caused injuries on the person of Brahmjit, Bhoop Singh and Shish Ram. Injuries on the person of Shish Ram and Bhoop Singh were found to be simple in nature, whereas, injury No.1 on the person of injured Brahmjit was caused with a sharp edged weapon. In these circumstances, respondent Nos. 2 to 4 were liable to be sentenced to imprisonment as ordered by the trial Court. Learned Appellate Court, while upholding the conviction of respondent Nos. 2 to 4 under Sections 323/325/34 IPC held that the complainant and the accused were related to each other and the ends of justice would be met if respondent Nos. 2 to 4 were ordered to be released on probation and further directed them to pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation to each of the injured. The reasons given by the learned appellate Court do not call for any interference. Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE March 24, 2009 anita