Crl. Revision No.2100 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No.2100 of 2011 Date of decision: 12.10.2011 Manjit Singh and another ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Mr. Satnam Singh Gill, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Jaswinder Singh, DAG, Punjab. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ***** ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL) Petitioners were found guilty and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months under Section 323 IPC as well as to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 325 read with Section 34 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala, vide judgment dated 17.10.2006. The appeal filed by the accused/revisionists was dismissed and judgment passed by the learned trial Court was upheld by learned Appellate Court/Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, vide judgment dated Crl. Revision No.2100 of 2011 -2- 8.8.2011. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that he is not pressing this revision on merit and is not challenging the conviction of the accused under Sections 323, 325 read with Section 34 IPC. Learned counsel has argued that this Court may enhance the compensation/fine to be paid to the injured under Section 357 Cr.P.C. and may consider to reduce the sentence for the period already undergone. Mr. Jaswinder Singh, DAG, Punjab, states that injured has died during the pendency of the case. He further states that petitioner/revisionists are the first time offenders and no other criminal case is pending against them. He further submits that the petitioner/accused have already undergone about two months. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. In the opinion of this Court, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the accused/petitioners in the company of hardcore criminals; they have already faced mental agony; reducing the sentence for the period already undergone and enhancing the fine/compensation to be paid to the LRs of the deceased seems to be best option. Therefore, sentence is reduced for the period already undergone in the present case. However, fine/compensation imposed upon the petitioners is enhanced to Rs.25,000/- each over and above the fine already imposed by the Trial Court to be paid to the LRs of the deceased under Section 357 Cr.P.C. The petitioners are directed to deposit the above said amount, within one month from today, with the Trial Court. It is made clear that in case enhanced amount is not deposited, as directed above, Crl. Revision No.2100 of 2011 -3- this revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed. With above mentioned modification in the matter of sentence, this revision petition stands disposed of. (Alok Singh) Judge October 12, 2011 R.S.