-1- Criminal Revision No.579 of 1999. IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... Criminal Revision No.579 of 1999. Date of Decision: January 18, 2010. Bharpur Singh (since deceased) represented by his legal representatives Harbans Singh (son), Atar Singh (son), Kulwinder Kaur (daughter), Harpreeet Kaur (daughter) and Sukhdev Kaur (wife) ...Petitioners VERSUS State of Punjab and another ...Respondents 1. Whether the Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? QUORUM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL. Present: Mr. S.K. Bawa, Advocate, for complainant Bharpur Singh (since deceased) represented by his legal representatives Harbans Singh (son), Atar Singh (son), Kulwinder Kaur (daughter), Harpreeet Kaur (daughter) and Sukhdev Kaur (wife). Mr. Vishal Munjal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. for the appellant-State. Mr. Dhirinder Chopra, Advocate, for accused- respondent No.2 Nazar Singh. -.- MOHINDER PAL, J. This revision petition filed by complainant Bharpur Singh (since deceased) represented by his legal representatives i.e Harbans Singh (son), Atar Singh (son), Kulwinder Kaur (daughter), Harpreeet Kaur (daughter) and Sukhdev Kaur (wife) -2- Criminal Revision No.579 of 1999. was ordered to be listed for hearing with Criminal Appeal No.994-SBA of 1999 (State of Punjab v. Nazar Singh). Impugned in this revision petition, filed by the complainant, is the judgment dated 1.3.1999 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur, whereby the appeal filed by accused-respondent Nazar Singh against the judgment of conviction and the sentence order dated 12.2.1999 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sangrur, convicting and sentencing Nazar Singh under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code (for short `the Code') was accepted and the accused-respondent was acquitted of the charge framed against him. The trial Magistrate had sentenced accused-respondent Nazar Singh to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one and a half years and to pay fine of Rs.300/-, in default whereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months under Section 325 of the Code for causing grievous hurt to Bharpur Singh (complainant) fracturing his left arm while extending the benefit of probation to Gurjant Singh and Ram Singh, co-accused of accused-respondent Nazar Singh, for causing simple injuries, one each, with `Sotis' to Bharpur Singh. Criminal Appeal No.994-SBA of 1999 has been decided by me today by passing the following order:- “ In view of the above, this appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment -3- Criminal Revision No.579 of 1999. passed by the lower appellate Court whereby accused-respondent Nazar Singh was acquitted of the charge framed against him by setting aside the judgment of conviction and the sentence order passed by the trial Court is hereby set aside. The judgment of conviction as recorded by the trial Court against accused-respondent Nazar Singh convicting him under Section 325 of the Code is hereby upheld/restored. As stated above, the trial Magistrate had sentenced accused-respondent Nazar Singh to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one and a half years and to pay fine of Rs.300/-, in default whereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months under Section 325 of the Code. However, keeping in view the fact that the occurrence relates to October, 1997 and the Sword of Damocles has remained hanging over the head of accused-respondent Nazar Singh for more than twelve years, I am of the considered opinion that ends of justice will be adequately met with if a lenient view in the matter of sentence is taken. -4- Criminal Revision No.579 of 1999. Accordingly, accused-respondent Nazar Singh is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 325 of the Code. However, accused- respondent Nazar Singh is imposed fine of Rs.50,000/-. He shall deposit the amount of fine of Rs.50,000/- before the trial Court within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In case he fails to deposit the amount of fine, he will have to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. It is worth mentioning here that normally, in default of payment of fine, the convict is ordered to further undergo one-third of the actual sentence awarded to him. However, since in this case the rigorous imprisonment of only six months has been awarded to accused- respondent Nazar Singh under Section 325 of the Code on account of the fact that heavy fine of Rs.50,000/- has been imposed upon him, he has been ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months in case he fails to deposit the -5- Criminal Revision No.579 of 1999. fine, as stipulated above. The amount of fine, if realized, shall go to the legal heirs of injured Bharpur Singh (since deceased) and represented by his legal representatives i.e Harbans Singh(son), Atar Singh (son), Kulwinder Kaur (daughter), Harpreeet Kaur (daughter) and Sukhdev Kaur (wife). This appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated above.” Resultantly, in view of the above-quoted order passed by me in Criminal Appeal No.994-SBA of 1999 (State of Punjab v. Nazar Singh) today, this revision petition is also allowed to the extent Criminal Appeal No.994-SBA of 1999 has been allowed. January 18, 2010. ( MOHINDER PAL ) ak JUDGE