Criminal Revision No. 482 of 1995 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No. 482 of 1995 Date of Decision: 14.2.2008. Ajit Singh and Others …Petitioners Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. D.S.Pheruman, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Mehardeep Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, for the State. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) The present revision petition has been filed by Ajit Singh, Lakhwinder Singh alias Shinder Singh, Kabal Singh and Nishan Singh. They have been nominated as accused in case FIR No. 11 dated 11.2.1992 registered at Police Station Khemkaran under Sections 326, 324, 323, 34 IPC. The FIR was lodged on the statement of Amrik Singh injured, who has not been examined. In his statement, he has stated that on 8.2.1992 at 7.00 PM when he was present in his house, Ajit Singh armed with Gandhali, Lakhwinder Singh armed with Takua, Kabal Singh Criminal Revision No. 482 of 1995 2 armed with Kirpan and Nishan Singh armed with Kirpan, came in front of his house and started raising cat calls. They also raised loud abuses. It is stated that as a result of cat calls and abuses, Pritam Singh, PW.2 along with Shingara Singh, PW.3 were attracted to the spot. In their presence, accused were said to have given the injuries to the complainant. It is stated that Ajit Singh gave Gandhali blow, which hit the complainant on the back side of his head, resulting which he fell on the ground. While the complainant was lying on the ground, Lakhwinder Singh gave a takua blow, which hit the complainant on his left cheek. Kabal Singh gave a Kirpan blow, which hit the complainant on his left wrist. Nishan Singh also gave Kirpan blow, which hit Amrik Singh on his left arm. Kabal Singh gave another Kirpan blow on the person of complainant, which hit him on his left arm. After submission of report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., charge was framed to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. PW.1 Dr. J.S.Chadda had medicolegally examined Amrik Singh son of Chanan Singh. In his testimony, he has stated that he found the following injuries on the person of Amrik Singh:- “1. An incised wound 3 X 0.5 cm X bone deep present on the occipital region 6 cm. Away from right ear. Blood clots were present. On examination, fresh blood clots came out. 2. Incised wound 7 cm X 0.5 cm X muscle deep present on the left forearm in the back and on the radius size upto the back Criminal Revision No. 482 of 1995 3 of hand. 3. Incised wound 7 cm X 0.5 cm X muscle deep present on the left forearm in the back and on the radius size upto the back hand. 4. Incised wound 3 cm X ½ cm X muscle deep present on the left forearm 1 cm above injury No.3. 5. Incised wound 4.5 cm X ½ cm X bone deep present on the left forearm 1 cm above injury No.4. The underlying bone was cut.” Injury No.5 was declared grievous. Mr. D.S.Pheruman, Advocate, appearing for the accused/petitioners has raised two submissions before me. Firstly, it has been submitted that injury No.5, which has been declared grievous, has not been radiologically examined and there is no X-ray to the effect that the injury was declared grievous. Second submission is that Amrik Singh injured has not appeared in the witness box and, therefore, no reliance can be placed on the testimony of PW.2 Pritam Singh and PW.3 Shangara Singh. Another limb of the argument raised is that it has been stated by PW.2 Pritam Singh in his cross-examination that he was attracted to the spot after Amrik Singh had been given injuries and PW.3 Shangar Singh had followed him. The first argument of Mr. Pheruman cannot be accepted as from clinical examination, it is quite evident that bone was cut, therefore, Criminal Revision No. 482 of 1995 4 there was no necessity of X-ray. Furthermore, the doctor who is an expert witness is the best person to opine whether the injury falls within the definition of Section 326 IPC or not. It would have been appropriate to mention that if in cross-examination questions were put to the doctor to counter his opinion. I have read the testimony of PW.1 Dr. J.S.Chadda along with Mr. Pheruman. No cross-examination on this score has been directed. Coming to second argument that in cross-examination PW.2 Pritam Singh stated that he was attracted to the spot after the injuries were given to Amrik Singh and PW.3 Shangar Singh followed him thereafter. Two Courts below have considered this factual matrix and on facts had opined that PW.2 Pritam Singh and PW.3 Shangara Singh are reliable witnesses. In revisional Court, I will not tread on the path of re-evaluation and re-appreciation of the evidence. Even otherwise, the testimony of PW.2 Pritam Singh will be admissible. Be as it may, there is nothing to find a contrary view with the view taken by the two Courts below. There is neither any perversity nor there is any irregularity or patent illegality. At this stage, Mr. Pheruman has made an alternative prayer that in the present case, occurrence had taken place on 8.2.1992 and period of 16 years has lapsed. The petitioners have not committed any offence in the last 16 years and they maintained amity, peace and harmony in the village. He has further stated that sending the petitioners behind the bars may disturb amity and harmony, which is prevailing in the village. It has been further stated that Kabal Singh has undergone three months behind the bars, whereas other three accused have Criminal Revision No. 482 of 1995 5 undergone two months and 23 days. Taking into consideration protracted trial, antecedents of the accused and the fact that they have undergone three months, it would be appropriate to reduce their sentence to already undergone. Sentence of fine is enhanced from Rs.1,000/- to Rs.10,000/- each, which shall be deposited by the petitioners in the Court on or before 15.5.2008. The fine so deposited shall be disbursed to the injured. Non-deposit of fine by them will be construed as dismissal of the present revision petition. With these modifications, the present revision petition is disposed off. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge February 14, 2008 “DK”