IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Crl. Rev. No. 624 of 2004 Date of Decision: April 30,2009 Ram Kumar & Another ...............................................Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .......................................................... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Ashutosh Mohunta Present: Ms. Promila Nain, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. R.S.Kundu, Addl. A.G. Haryana. ... ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J. (Oral) The challenge in this revision petition is to the order passed by the SDJM Pehowa dated 24.11.2002 and the order dated 26.2.2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, vide which the petitioners have been held guilty and convicted under Sections 323 and 325 read with Section 34 IPC and have been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two months for the commission of offence punishable under Section 323 read with Section 34 IPC and simple imprisonment for a period of four months and to pay a fine of Rs.250/- each and in default of payment of fine, they shall further undergo simple imprisonment for five days each for the offence punishable under Section 325 read with Section 34 IPC. [ 2 ] Crl. Rev. No. 624 of 2004 The case against the petitioners was registered on the basis of statement of Hari Ram PW1 which was as under:- “I am resident of village Neem-Wala under the Police Station, Pehowa and an agriculturist by profession. I got decreed the land measuring 4 kanals 7 marlas i.e. the share of the daughters of my paternal uncle named Smt. Kelo Devi and Smt. Shanti Devi about 8-10 months back with their consent and I am cultivating that land since then but Ram Kumar son of Jagat Ram took stay order from the court and destroyed my standing crop and planted paddy crop, but on 4.12.1992 I got the stay order in favour of Ram Kumar vacated and sown my wheat crop and yesterday at about 9.00 P.M., Ram Kumar son of Jagat Ram and Ruldu Ram son of Narata Ram with their oxen and Harrow started ploughing my standing crop and I along with my son named Om Parkash went to take round of the field and saw Ram Kumar and Ruldu Ram in the area of Sonsar destroying my crop. I and my son asked them to stop. Ram Kumar gave a lathi blow on the wrist of my left arm resulting into fracture in my arm and Ruldu gave a lathi blow on my left leg. Ram Kumar gave another blow of lathi on my left knee and Ruldu Ram gave another blow of lathi below my left knee and then third blow of lathi was given by Ruldu Ram in front of my left leg and Ram Kumar gave another blow of lathi on my right shoulder. Ruldu hit my head with lathi towards right side. Ram Kumar gave a lathi blow on the wrist [ 3 ] Crl. Rev. No. 624 of 2004 of the left arm of Om Parkash. .I raised alarm. My brother Ram Dhari and my nephew Iswar also came to the spot. Ruldu gave a lathi blow in the head of my nephew Iswar and Ram Kumar gave a lathi blow on my nephew Iswar on his right shoulder and then Ruldu Ram gave a lathi blow in the back of my nephew. We all raised alarm and several people came from the village and rescued us. Accused ran away from the spot. Had these people not come, accused would have beaten us up further. I fell unconscious. My brother Ram Dhari etc. brought me to Community Health Centre, Pehowa from the fields. You have written my statement and I have heard the same. Take legal action against the accused.” In order to support their case the prosecution relied on the statement of PW1 Hari Ram, PW2 Om Parkash and PW5 Ishwar Datt, all of whom were injured witnesses. The ocular version given by the prosecution witnesses is duly supported by the medical evidence. The depositions of PW3 Dr. Rajan Kohli, who medico-legally examined all the injured, and evidence of PW4 Dr. P.K.Gupta, who had X-rayed Hari Ram, clearly showed that the ocular version is fully corroborated by the medical evidence. On the basis of the aforementioned evidence, the petitioners were convicted by the SDJM Pehowa vide judgment dated 24.11.2002. The appeal filed by the petitioners was also dismissed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, who affirmed the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court. [ 4 ] Crl. Rev. No. 624 of 2004 After going through the judgments passed by both the Courts below I find that there is no contradiction in the statement made by the prosecution witnesses which is duly supported by the medical evidence and, hence, I uphold the conviction of the petitioners under Sections 323/325 read with Section 34 IPC. However, so far as the question of sentencing of the petitioners is concerned, the occurrence took place on 12.12.1992. As more than 17 years have elapsed since the date of occurrence and the fact that the petitioners have faced long and protracted criminal proceedings, therefore, in my considered opinion the ends of justice would be met by reducing the sentence of the petitioners to the one already undergone by them. Revision petition is disposed of accordingly. 30.4.2009 ( ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA ) Rupi JUDGE