Criminal Revision No.357 of 1992 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.357 of 1992 Date of Decision: 26.02.2008. Ram Dhan and others .......Petitioner versus State of Haryana .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr.Kapil Aggarwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Dinesh Arora, AAG, Haryana. *** KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J.(Oral) In case FIR No.18 dated 26.03.1982 registered at Police Station Kalanaur under Sections 326/325/324/323/149 IPC, nine persons namely Ram Dhan, Ram Chander, Ram Kumar, Ram Sarup, Angoori, Kanta, Bala, Phullu and Ramesh @ Matru were tried by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rohtak and they were found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 326,323,325 read with Section 149 IPC and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each under Section 326 read with Section 149 IPC. They were also convicted under Section 325 read with Section 149 IPC and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.300/- each. They were also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- each under Section 323 read with Section 149 IPC. The sentences for the default Criminal Revision No.357 of 1992 2 were also prescribed and all the aforesaid sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved against the same, an appeal was filed by all the nine accused and the same was disposed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak, whereby Ram Sarup, Smt.Kanta, Smt.Angoori and Smt.Bala were acquitted while the conviction and sentence of the present petitioners was maintained. Hence, they have preferred the instant revision. Mr.Kapil Aggarwal, counsel for the petitioners states that in view of the findings of fact recorded by the two Courts below, he is unable to assail the testimonies of complainant as well as injured witnesses and both the Courts below have placed implicit reliance upon their testimonies. Learned counsel has failed to point out any illegality, infirmity in the findings of facts returned by the two Courts below. Faced with this situation, Mr.Kapil Aggarwal appearing for the petitioners states that in the present case, occurrence pertains to the year 1982 and a period of 26 years is going to lapse. The petitioners have already suffered agony of protracted trial. Mr.Kapil Aggarwal states that for the last 26 years, there is complete peace in the village and no untoward incident has taken place. The petitioners have maintained cordial relations with the opposite party. It has been further stated that the petitioners have already undergone about 28 days of their actual sentence. Taking into account antecedents of the accused and the fact that they have already suffered protracted trial and agony for about 26 years, ends of justice would be met if the sentence of the petitioners is reduced to the one already undergone by them. However, sentence of fine is enhanced to Rs.10,000/- qua each accused. Ordered accordingly. Criminal Revision No.357 of 1992 3 Non-deposit of fine by the petitioners shall render the present revision petition as dismissed. With the above modification, the instant petition stands disposed off. February 26, 2008 (KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA) seema JUDGE