Crl. Rev. No. 735 of 2005 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- Crl. Rev. No. 735 of 2005 (O&M) Date of decision:- 16.2.2011 Rajbir and another ... Petitioners Versus State of Haryana & Anr. ... Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present:- Mr. Partap Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. J.S.Rattu, DAG, Haryana. Gurdev Singh, J (oral) The petitioners – Rajbir and Ramesh @ Mahesha were named as one of the two accused along with Chhello, Ram Ratti and Bimla in the complaint filed against them by Kelo-complainant under Sections 323,324,149,148,452 and 506 IPC. After their trial they were convicted by Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Narwana, vide judgment dated 20.3.2004 and were sentenced as under:- Name of the accused Under Sections Coviction and sentence Chello, Ramratti, Bimla, Rajbir and Ramesh @ Mahesha 148 To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs.250/- each and in default thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days. Crl. Rev. No. 735 of 2005 (O&M) -2- Name of the accused Under Sections Coviction and sentence 323 read with Section 149 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month and to pay a fine of Rs.250/- each and in default thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 7 days. 324 read with Section 149 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.250/- each and in default thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. 452 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.250/- each and in default thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month 506 read with Section 149 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- each and in default thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 7 days. They preferred an appeal against the conviction and sentence, which was decided by the Sessions Judge, Jind, vide judgment dated 2.4.2005. Their conviction under Section 324 IPC was set aside whereas their conviction was maintained for the other offences. Chhello, Ram Ratti and Bimla-accused were given benefit of probation and were ordered to be released on executing the bonds for their good behavior. This revision Crl. Rev. No. 735 of 2005 (O&M) -3- petition has been preferred against the said conviction and sentence. As narrated in the complaint, the occurrence took place on 30.5.1995 at about 5 PM when the complainant was sitting in her house and the accused criminally trespassed into the same after arming themselves with lathis and jellies. Rajbir gave a blow with his jelly on the left cheek of the complainant whereas Bimla gave a blow with her lathi in the middle of her forehead. Challo gave a blow with lathi on her nose whereas Ram Ratti gave a blow with a brick on her right breast. Bimla gave another blow with her lathi on the right side of her chest and Ramesh gave fist blow on her jaw, resulting in shaking of her teeth. On the same day the complainant was medically examined by Dr. Om Partap in PHC, Kirthala an found the following injuries on her person:- “ i. Lacerated wound 3-1/2 cm x 1 / 2 cm into bone deep on the right side of forehead. 1 cm from the middle line and pain was present. Tenderness was present. X-ray of skull was advised for AP view and LAT view. ii. A contusion injury 16 cm x 8-1/2 cm on the left side of the face come pre-auricular region swelling present, pain present, tenderness present unable to open her mouth. Advised x-rays of left side of the face. Lateral view and AP view cum dentists opinion. iii.Abrasion injury 1 cm x 1/3 cm on the inner angle of the right eye nasal fold, pain present. iv.An abrasion injury 4-1/2 cm x 2 cm, on the right mammary region of the right chest wall on the interior surface, pain Crl. Rev. No. 735 of 2005 (O&M) -4- present, breathing difficulty present. Advise x-ray chest AP. v. A contusion injury 7 cm x 5 cm on the right mammary come infra mammary region of the right chest wall on the interior surface pain present breathing difficulty present. Advise x-ray chest AP and lateral view. vi.Right lateral incisor tooth is loose from the bed. Advise dentist opinion. However, after the x-ray examination and dentist opinion none of the injury was found to be grievous. The version of the complainant was translated into evidence in the Court by examining her and the other witnesses. I have heard learned counsel of both the sides. At the time of arguments the finding of conviction recorded by the trial Court and upheld by the appellate Court was not assailed by learned counsel for the petitioners/accused. He submitted that when the similarly situated accused were given the benefit of probation by the appellate Court, the petitioners should also have been given that very benefit as they were not previous convicts and were convicted of the offences which were not punishable with imprisonment of more than seven years. He prayed that benefit of probation be granted to the petitioners and in case the Court is not inclined to give that benefit, sentence of imprisonment so imposed upon them be reduced to the period already undergone by them. Learned State counsel submitted that he has no objection, if the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone by Crl. Rev. No. 735 of 2005 (O&M) -5- them, provided suitable compensation be awarded to the complainant, who suffered injuries at the hands of the present petitioners and the other accused. As per the custody certificate placed on the record, these petitioners have already undergone a sentence of imprisonment for a period of 2 months and 1 day. It is not the case of the prosecution that they are previous convicts. Interest of justice will be met in case the sentence so imposed upon them is reduced to the period already undergone by them and the complainant is suitably compensated for the injuries received by her at the hands of these petitioners. Accordingly, the revision petition is hereby decided to the effect that while maintaining the conviction of the petitioners the sentence of imprisonment so imposed upon them is reduced to the period already undergone by them. They are directed to pay a compensation of Rs.10,000/- each to the complainant for the injuries suffered by her. That compensation is to be paid/deposited in the trial Court within a period of two months of the passing of this order and failing that this revision petition shall stand dismissed. February 16, 2011 (Gurdev Singh) tripti Judge