CRR No.1648 of 2003 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.R. No.1648 of 2003 Date of Decision : 09.03.2011 Amar Singh and others ……Petitioners Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI -.- Present: Mr. N.S. Swaich, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.S. Chandumajra, D.A.G., Punjab. *** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers 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? AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) This petition has been filed against the judgments of the Courts below convicting the petitioners under Section 323, 324, 326, 34 IPC in case F.I.R. No.149 dated 18.10.1990 registered at Police CRR No.1648 of 2003 -2- Station Sadar, Rajpura. The learned Courts below convicted the petitioners and sentenced them to undergo as under:- Under Section 326/34 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for one and a half year and to pay a fine of Rs.1500/- each and in default, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months. Under Section 324/34 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each and in default, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 months. Under Section 323/34 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each. As per the prosecution version the petitioners inflicted various injuries on the complainant party. Ultimately one of the injuries made by safajang blow on the left leg of Paramjit Kaur, daughter of the complainant, was declared grievous in nature. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the complaints have roped in the entire family. He has also pointed out various alleged infirmities in the prosecution version. Learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab has defended the judgments of the Courts below and has argued that the Courts below have come to the correct conclusion regarding the guilt of the petitioners after considering the conspectus of the entire evidence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has taken me through CRR No.1648 of 2003 -3- the judgments of the Courts below but he has not been able to convince me that the judgments of the Courts below suffer from any palpable perversity or are even arguable arbitrariness. However, it has to be noticed that the occurrence took place in the year 1990 and thus the petitioners have been facing the agony of this criminal trial for the past 20 year and that in itself is a punishment. In these circumstances, without upsetting the conviction of the petitioners, I deem it appropriate to reduce the sentence of the petitioners to that they have already undergone. Ordered accordingly. Petition stands disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) March 09, 2011 JUDGE ashish