Criminal Revision No. 321 of 1996 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 321 of 1996 Date of decision: 12-1-2010 Har Narain and others .........Petitioners Vs State of Haryana .........Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL Present: Shri Hemant Bassi, Advocate, for the petitioners Shri Tarunveer Vashishta, Additional A.G. Haryana HARBANS LAL, J. This revision is directed by Har Narain, Suraj Gir, Onkar Gir, Akamgir, Ram Chander, Roshan, Kapur, Sheo Narain, Jai Narain, Dharma, Rishala and Giani Ram against the judgment dated 21.5.1996 passed by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hissar whereby he dismissed the appeal preferred against the judgment/order of sentence dated 8.7.1992 rendered by the court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hissar whereby he convicted all these accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each under Section 326 read with Section 149 of IPC and in default of payment of fine, the defaulter to undergo further imprisonment for a period of three months and further sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 324 read with Section 149 of IPC and also sentenced each of them, to undergo imprisonment for a period of six Criminal Revision No. 321 of 1996 2 months under Section 323 read with Section 149 of IPC and further sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months under Section 148 of IPC with a further direction that all the sentences shall run concurrently. The facts in brief are that on 20.5.1981 around 12.30 p.m. Raj Pal was on his way back to his house situated in the village. When he reached near the cremation ground, he noticed Puran Gir son of Hari Gir, Nathu Gir son of Somvar Gir, Balur son of Nathu Gir and Shanti wife of Nathu Gir have been encircled by accused Suraj Gir, Omkar Gir, Akamgir sons of Hari Gir, Jai Narain and Giani sons of Rishala, Kapura, Roshan sons of Har Narain. The turn of water of Puran Gir had commenced at 10 A.M. on Monday and it continued upto 4.00 P.M. on Thursday. The accused party wanted to utilize that water. When Nathu Gir attempted to proceed to the Police Station for lodging a report in this regard, he was obstructed by the accused. He had tried to prevail upon the accused, who desisted him from doing so. In the meanwhile, Har Narain, Dharama, Risala alongwith his sons Ram Chander and Sheo Narain armed with lathies, jellies and Farsa came at the spot. They raised a lalkara that the enemy has come in their grip and he be not permitted to leave. The accused Har Narain gave Farsa blow, which landed on the back of Raj Pal, who fell down on the ground. Suraj Gir gave Farsa blow on the right side of his head followed by Risala and Ram Chander who gave lathi blows each on his back and right hand. On being raised alarm, his own brother Jagdish came at the spot, but he was also given a Farsa blow by Onkar Gir on the right side of his head. Hakam Gir gave lathiwise blow from his jelly which rested on the right shoulder of Criminal Revision No. 321 of 1996 3 Jagdish followed by another lathi blow by accused Roshan which landed on his right eye Kapura gave lathi blow on the right hand of Jagdish. On hearing the shrieks Jaswar was attracted to the place of the occurrence. When he tried to intervene physically, he was also assasulted by Nathu Gir, Puran Gir, Balu Gir, Shanti and other accused. The complainant party also caused injuries to the accused party in their self defence. Raj Pal as well Jagdish were shifted to Civil Hospital, Hisar. The case was registered. The accused were arrested. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was laid in the court of learned Ilaqa Magistrate for trial of the accused. The accused were charged under Sections 326/324/323/148 read with Section 149 IPC to which they did not plead guilty and claimed trial. To bring home guilt against the accused the prosecution examined Dr. Harish Arora (PW-1), Raj Pal (PW-2), Jagdish (PW-3), Dr. Partap Singh (PW-4), Dr.R.P.Chugh (PW-5), Puran Gir (PW-6), Shanti (PW-7), Kashmiri (PW-8) and Ram Chander ASI (PW-9), Devi Dutt (PW-10) and closed its evidence. When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., all the accused denied the incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence against them and pleaded false implication. In their defence, they examined Sat Narain DW-1 and Siri Ram Chhakar retired DSP as DW.2. After hearing learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State, the learned defence counsel and examining the evidence on record, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused as noticed at the outset. Feeling aggrieved therewith, they went in appeal which was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions judge, Hisar. Being undaunted and dissatisfied Criminal Revision No. 321 of 1996 4 with the judgments recorded by both the Courts below, the accused have filed this revision. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, besides perusing the record with due care and circumspection. Mr. Hemant Bassi Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners realising that he won't be able to persuade the court to take a contrary view submitted that the sentence of the petitioners may be reduced to the one already undergone. I have well considered this submission. A glance through the judgments recorded by both the Courts below would reveal that there is nothing to depart from the view adopted by both the courts below. Consequently, the conviction is upheld. At this stage, Mr. Bassi has produced the death certificates of Risala, Dharma and Har Narain petitioners. These are taken on record. In view of these certificates, this petition qua Risala, Dharma and Har Narain abates. As per the custody certificates taken on record, Suraj Gir, Ram Chander, Roshan, Kapur, Sheo Narain, Jai Narain, and Giani petitioners have undergone 11 days of the actual sentence, whereas Onkar Gir and Akam Gir have undergone 14 days and 17 days respectively of the actual sentence. It is apt to be borne in mind that occurrence took place as far back as in the month of May, 1981. Thus, ostensibly, this incident is more than 28 years old. Such happenings do take place in ordinary life and there is nothing unusual. After this occurrence, there has been no incident between the parties and one feels that the parties have to come to peace and Criminal Revision No. 321 of 1996 5 there has been forgetting and forgiving. In such a case, if the petitioners are sent to jail to serve the remaining period of sentence, this may revive the bad blood between the parties. To my mind, ends of justice would be adequately met, if the sentence is slashed to the period undergone. Accordingly, the sentence of the petitioners is reduced to the already undergone. With this modification in the order of sentence, this revision petition fails and is dismissed. (HARBANS LAL) JUDGE January 12 , 2010 RSK NOTE: Whether to be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes/No