Criminal Revision No.2109 of 2002 (O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Criminal Revision No.2109 of 2002 (O&M) Date of decision: 27.5.2009 Harjit Singh and another ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.P.S.Kang, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Aman Deep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab. **** SABINA, J. The petitioners were convicted for an offence under Sections 326/ 324/ 452/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC” for short) vide judgment dated 22.12.2000 by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Mansa. Vide order of the even date, the petitioners were sentenced as under:- Harjit Singh under Section 326 IPC He shall undergo R.I. for a period of 1-1/2 year and shall pay a fine of Rs.500/-. under Section 324/34 IPC He shall undergo R.I. for a period of 6 months and shall pay a fine of Rs.500/-. under Section 452 IPC He shall undergo R.I. for a period of 6 months. Criminal Revision No.2109 of 2002 (O&M) 2 Ranjit Singh under Section 324 IPC He shall undergo R.I. for a period of six months and shall pay a fine of Rs.500/-. under Section 324/34 IPC He shall undergo R.I. for a period of 6 months and shall pay a fine of Rs.500/-. under Section 452 IPC He shall undergo R.I. for a period of 6 months. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed vide judgment dated 17.10.2002 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mansa. Hence, the present revision petition. Prosecution case, as noticed by the Appellate Court in para 2 of its judgment, is reproduced herein below:- “Succinctly put the facts of the prosecution case are that on 15th June, 1995, Babu Singh son of Veer Singh resident of Sardara Patti, Boha, made statement Ex.PW2/A before Joginder Singh, Sub Inspector/ Addl. Station House Officer, Police Station Boha in the terms that he is residing in Boha and is a carpenter by profession. Around 5:30 am., he along with his wife, Harmit Kaur and their neighbour Iqbal Singh son of Sohan Singh, Jat, were talking with each other while sitting in the court yard of his house. In the meanwhile, Ranjit Singh son of Piara Singh (accused) duly armed with gandasa Criminal Revision No.2109 of 2002 (O&M) 3 and Harjit Singh son of Piara Singh (accused) duly armed with Takua, entered his house and raised Lalkara that let he be taught a lesson for disputing about the plot. Ranjit Singh delivered a gandasa blow which landed near his right hand’s thumb. Harjit Singh dealt a Takua blow, which hit him (Babu Singh) on the toes of his right foot and as its result, hi toes were amputated and his wife raised alarm of “Killed-Killed”, whereupon, the above mentioned accused decamped from the spot with their respective weapons. Meanwhile, Rajwinder Singh, his son, who was asleep in the house of his neighbour, on hearing the noise, came there. The entire occurrence was witnessed by his wife as also Iqbal Singh. The motive behind the occurrence is that the dispute in relation to plot was going on between him (Babu Singh) and Harjit Singh and Ranjit Singh sons of Piara Singh and for that reason, they after pre-meditation, caused injuries to him. Rajwinder Singh, his son, after having arranged a vehicle, got him admitted in Civil Hospital, Mansa, where he was treated upon by the Doctor. The action be initiated against the above accused.” Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that during the pendency of this petition, petitioner No.2 has expired on 8.9.2007. A copy of his death certificate has been placed on record. Criminal Revision No.2109 of 2002 (O&M) 4 Accordingly, this petition qua petitioner No.2 Ranjit Singh is disposed of as having abated. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that the sentence qua imprisonment of petitioner No.1 be reduced to as already undergone by him as he was not a previous convict. Learned counsel has not challenged the conviction of petitioner No.1 under Sections 326, 324/34 and 452 IPC. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, it is a fit case where the sentence qua imprisonment of petitioner No.1 is liable to be reduced to as already undergone by him. Accordingly, conviction of petitioner No.1 Harjit Singh under Sections 326, 324/34 and 452 IPC is maintained. However, his sentence qua imprisonment is reduced to as already undergone by him and sentence qua fine under Section 326 IPC is enhanced from Rs.500/- to Rs.5,000/-. The enhanced amount of fine be deposited within one month from today, failing which, this petition qua petitioner No.1 shall stand dismissed. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. (SABINA) JUDGE May 27, 2009 anita