Criminal Revision No.1668 of 2004 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.1668 of 2004 Date of Decision: 08.02.2011 Fiaz ....Petitioner Versus Union Territory, Chandigarh ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH Present: Mr. Gaurav Chopra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sarfaraz Hussain, Advocate, for the respondent – UT, Chandigarh. NAWAB SINGH.J (ORAL) Challenge herein is to the judgment dated August 5th, 2004 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated March 28th, 2001 of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh, whereby, petitioner was convicted and sentenced as under: - Offence Sentence Fine In default 323/34 IPC RI for 6 months --- --- 325 IPC RI for 1 year Rs.500/- 1 month 325/34 IPC RI for 1 year Rs.500/- 1 month The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. Prosecution story, in brief, is that on September 6th, 1994 at about 10.00 AM, petitioner along with his co-accused Imtiaz, Salim and Jhakir had a quarrel with Ashok Kumar, Amit Kumar and Kirpa Devi over a trivial matter of taking water from hand- pump. In the occurrence, trio received injuries at the hands of the petitioner and his co-accused. Petitioner also received injuries at the hands of the opposite party. Criminal Revision No.1668 of 2004 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that he does not challenge the conviction and prays for reduction of the sentence. It has been added that petitioner has already undergone actual sentence of 2 months and 4 days. He also received two injuries as detailed in paragraph No.17 of the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge and the same were caused by blunt weapon. The injuries attributed to him were on second left metacarpal bone of left hand and middle phylynx index finger of Kirpa Devi. He is the only bread winner of his family. Prior to the registration of the present case, there was no criminal case registered against him nor thereafter. The occurrence took place way back in 1994, that is, 16 years ago and that too, on the issue of water of hand-pump. 4. Submissions of the petitioner being convincing, this Court is of the opinion that it would be in the interest of justice, if the sentence imposed upon the petitioner is reduced to the period already undergone by him. Ordered accordingly. 5. The revision is accepted partly as indicated above. (NAWAB SINGH) JUDGE 08.02.2011 SN