IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.2247 of 2005 Date of Decision 04.03.2010 Suraj Mal and others ...... Petitioners VERSUS State of Haryana ...... Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Jagdish Manchanda, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Rajiv Malhotra, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana. ***** A.N.JINDAL, J(ORAL): Six accused namely Kapoora, Sada Ram, Surajmal, Raju, Churia and Ram Diya faced trial under Sections 323, 324, 342, 506 read with Sections 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code and vide judgment dated 26/27.03.2003, passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kaithal, all of them except Kapoora and Sada Ram were convicted and sentenced as under:- 342, 323, 506 read R.I. for a period of six months and to with Section 149 IPC pay a fine of Rs.200/- each; on each count; 324/149 IPC R.I. for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.250/- each; 325/149 IPC R.I. for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.350/- each; However, Kapoora and Sada Ram were extended benefit of probation under Section 360 Cr.P.C. Against the said judgment, the petitioners had preferred an appeal which was dismissed vide order dated 30.11.2005, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Kaithal. Briefly stated, the case was registered against the accused- petitioners (herein referred as 'the petitioners') as well as Kapoora and Sada Ram on the allegations that on 23.02.1994 at about 5:30 p.m., the complainant Suraj Bhan (herein referred as 'the complainant') alongwith Daya Singh son of Sh. Ram Kumar and Gurdeep son of Sh.Jiwan Singh was going to see the land taken by him on lease and when they were in the kacha Criminal Revision No.2247 of 2005 -2- passage situated on the southern side of Kaithal-Sangatpura road, the accused came with the sticks and in furtherance of their common object, raised a lalkara that they would teach them a lesson for taking possession of the land and caused them injuries. Case was investigated and challan was presented in the Court. Charges were framed for the aforesaid offences. Ultimately, they were convicted and sentenced accordingly. Having examined the record of the case, it transpires that there is ample evidence on the record to substantiate the charges against the petitioners. The testimonies of the injured eye witnesses namely Suraj Bhan complainant and Daya Singh stand corroborated by the medical evidence. There is no delay in lodging the FIR. Injuries on the person of the complainant stand explained. While coming to the quantum of sentence, it transpires that out of the five injuries on the person of Daya Ram, there was dislocation distal inter-phalyngeal on his person which was treated as grievous in nature. However, on x-ray examination of the complainant-injured, no fracture was seen. The occurrence took place way back in the year 1994. The petitioners have already undergone about 3 months of the substantive sentence. Keeping in view the longevity of the trial, the fact that the grievous injury is on the non-vital part and the injured could be compensated for the injuries suffered by them, it would be in the fitness of things to take some leniency on the quantum of sentence. Resultantly, this petition is dismissed with the modification in the sentence to that of already undergone without any alteration in the sentence of fine. However, the petitioners are ordered to pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- each on account of compensation, to the injured namely Suraj Bhan and Daya Singh in equal share, failing which this petition shall be treated as dismissed in toto. Copy of this order be sent to Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaithal, for compliance. (A.N.Jindal) Judge 04.03.2010 mamta-II