IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 1504 of 2010(O&M) Date of decision: 26.7.2010 Habib Ahmed and others ......Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY. PRESENT: Mr.Mohd. Yousaf, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Vishal Munjal, Addl.A.G.Punjab. **** ORDER The present revision has been filed by petitioners Habib Ahmed, Akram @ Bikram, Gulfaz Khan @ Zulfi, Naeem Khan @ Nimmi and Rocky against judgment dated 8.2.2010 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge (Adhoc) Fast Track Court-II, Sangrur vide which the appeal filed by the petitioners against judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 13.12.2006 passed by SDJM Malerkotra has been dismissed. Notice of motion was issued on 24.5.2010 only with regard to quantum of sentence. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have undergone more than six months of actual sentence against the total sentence of one year and if the sentence is reduced to the period already Crl. Revision No. 1504 of 2010 [2] undergone, they are ready to to pay some reasonable amount of compensation to the complainant. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners have already suffered the agony of protracted trial for the last more than 7 years, they are first offenders and are also poor persons. They are sole bread-winner of the family. Learned counsel for the State has not controverted the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and also submits that in case the petitioners are ready to pay some amount of compensation to the complainant, their sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone. I have heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the impugned judgments passed by the courts below as well as other documents available on record. Notice of motion was issued only with regard to quantum of sentence. learned counsel for the petitioners has made a limited prayer for reduction of sentence to the period already undergone and they are also ready to pay some reasonable amount of compensation to the complainant. In the present case, FIR was registered on the basis of statement made by complainant Faqir Mohd under Sections 148/452/324/323/149 IPC for causing injuries to the complainant party. The witnesses have categorically deposed as to the manner in which the petitioners caused injuries to the complainant party. The learned SDJM, Malerkotla after hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the evidence on record, convicted the petitioners under Sections Crl. Revision No. 1504 of 2010 [3] 148/452/324/323/149 IPC and sentenced them as under: Habib Ahmed, Akram, Gulfaz Khan, Naeem Khan and Rocky U/S 148 IPC U/S 452 IPC To undergo RI for six months each To undergo RI for one year each and to pay fine of Rs.500/- each in default thereof, they will undergo RI for one month each. Bikram @ Akram U/S 324 IPC To undergo RI for one year and to pay fine of Rs.500/- , in default thereof, he will undergo RI for one month. Naeem, Habib, Zulfi U/s 324/149 IPC To undergo RI for one year each and to pay fine of Rs.500/- each, in default thereof, they will undergo RI for one month each. Rocky U/s 324 IPC To undergo RI for one year and to pay fine o fRs.500/-, in default thereof, he will undergo RI for one month. Zulfi and Naeem U/S 323 IPC To undergo RI for six months, each Habib, Bikram alias Akram and Rocky U/s 323/149 IPC To undergo RI for six months, each. Feeling aggrieved against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by SDJM, Malerkotla, the petitioners filed an appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc) Fast Track Court-II, Sangrur which was also dismissed and judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court was upheld. The present revision has been filed against the aforesaid judgment passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge (Adhoc) Fast Track Court-II, Sangrur dated 8.2.2010. Since learned counsel for the petitioners has made a limited prayer with regard to quantum of sentence and has also prayed that the petitioners have undergone more than six months of total sentence against the total sentence of one year and are ready to pay some amount of compensation to the complainant, the request of the petitioners seems to be Crl. Revision No. 1504 of 2010 [4] genuine. Moreover, the petitioners have already suffered the agony of protracted trial for the last more than 7 years and are first offenders. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioners are first offenders having no criminal background and have already undergone more than 6 months of actual sentence against total sentence of one year and have faced the agony of protracted trial since May 2003, the prayer of the petitioners is allowed. Under these circumstances, while maintaining the conviction of petitioners namely, Habib Ahmed, Akram @ Bikram, Gulfaz Khan @ Zulfi, Naeem Khan @ Nimmi and Rocky under Sections 148/452/324/323/149 IPC, the sentence imposed upon them is reduced to the period already undergone subject to payment of Rs.15,000/- as compensation to the complainant which is to be shared equally by the petitioners. The said amount be deposited in the trial Court within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, failing which the petitioners shall undergo the remainder of sentence. With above modification, the petition is disposed of. (DAYA CHAUDHARY) JUDGE July 26, 2010. raghav