IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 1480 of 2002 Date of Decision : January 28, 2010 Nachhatar Singh and another ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Mr. I.K. Mehta, Senior Advocate with Mr. M.S. Kohli, Advocate Mr. P.S. Grewal, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab T.P.S. MANN, J. (Oral) For an occurrence, which was said to have taken place on 24.5.1995 at about 4.00 P.M., wherein Jagtar Singh-complainant and Santokh Singh received injuries, FIR No. 40 dated 25.5.1995 was registered against the petitioners at Police Station Sherpur for offences under Sections 323/324/326/34 IPC. After completion of the investigation, final report was submitted by the police for trying the petitioners for the offences under Sections 326/323/34 IPC. They were charge sheeted for the said offences and after recording of the evidence and hearing learned counsel for the parties, learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhuri, vide judgment dated 12.5.2001 convicted Paramjit Singh-petitioner under Section 326 IPC, while Nachhatar Criminal Revision No. 1480 of 2002 -2- Singh-petitioner under Section 326/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, the defaulting petitioner was directed to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. Both the petitioners were also convicted under Section 323 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months each. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved of their conviction and sentences, the petitioners filed an appeal, which was dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur on 15.7.2002. Simultaneously, the revision filed by Jagtar Singh complainant for enhancement of sentences of the petitioners was dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioners has not challenged the conviction of the petitioners. However, he has submitted that the occurrence had taken place about 15 years ago. None of the petitioners is a previous convict and there is no male member in their respective families, who can earn for their livelihood. The sword of criminal prosecution has been hanging on the heads of the petitioners ever since the registration of the FIR. Both the petitioners have also undergone a substantive period of about two and a half months in jail. Therefore, the sentences of imprisonment of the petitioners be reduced to that already undergone by them. Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer made on Criminal Revision No. 1480 of 2002 -3- behalf of the petitioners by submitting that both of them had used deadly weapons in inflicting injuries upon complainant Jagtar Singh and Santokh Singh. One of the injuries on the left arm of Santokh Singh was declared grievous in nature. Therefore, the sentences of imprisonment imposed upon the petitioners do not call for any modification/alteration. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. It is a fact that the FIR was registered against the petitioners on 25.5.1995. Ever since then, both the petitioners have been facing the agony of criminal prosecution. The grievous injury found on the person of Santokh Singh injured was not on any vital part. Apart from the said injury which was caused with a gandhali wielded by Paramjit Singh- petitioner, all the other injuries on the persons of complainant Jagtar Singh and Santokh Singh were the result of blunt weapons. Both the petitioners remained in jail as under-trials for about two weeks. They were again taken into custody on 15.7.2002, when their appeal was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge and thereafter released from the jail on 12.9.2002 pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 9.9.2002 granting them the concession of bail. Thus, both the petitioners have already undergone a period of about two and a half months each. Sending the petitioners behind the bars now so as to serve their remaining sentences is not likely to serve the cause of justice. On the Criminal Revision No. 1480 of 2002 -4- other hand, the sentences of imprisonment can be reduced to that already undergone by them. At the same time, fine imposed on both the petitioners can be suitably enhanced so as to compensate the two injured persons. Resultantly, conviction of the petitioners is maintained and their sentences of imprisonment are reduced to that already undergone by them. However, the fine of Rs.1,000/- imposed upon each of the petitioners by the trial Court is enhanced to Rs.25,000/-, in default thereof to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The enhanced amount of fine, on realisation, be paid to complainant Jagtar Singh and Santokh Singh as compensation in equal shares. The petitioners shall deposit the enhanced amount of fine within three months from today. The revision is, accordingly, disposed of. ( T.P.S. MANN ) January 28, 2010 JUDGE satish