Criminal Revision No. 1742 of 2002 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No. 1742 of 2002 Date of Decision: 29.3.2010 Gurbhej Singh …Petitioner Versus Mann Singh and Others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. B.R. Rana, Advocate for Mr. Hargobinder Singh Gill, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondents. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) The complainant has preferred the present revision petition for enhancement of sentence awarded to the respondents by the trial Court, vide its judgment dated 3.4.2002. The grievance of the complainant, as spelt out in the present revision petition, is that out of 16 accused, 14 were held guilty of an offence under Section 308 read with Section 149 IPC and sentenced only to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- each and the remaining two namely Piara Singh and Fateh Singh had since died. The fine, so deposited, was to be disbursed to the injured. It will be pertinent to notice that the State has not preferred any appeal for enhancement of sentence. The present revision petition Criminal Revision No. 1742 of 2002 2 was filed by the complainant on 16.8.2002. Nobody had caused appearance for the petitioner/complainant on 24.3.2009, 27.4.2009, 7.10.2009, and 20.10.2009, Thereafter, on 3.11.2009, Ms. Kanwaljit, Advocate, who was present in the Court, was appointed as Amicus Curiae. Though she appeared on two dates, but lateron she also did not represent the petitioner. On 15.2.2010 and 22.2.2010, notices were issued to her. Ultimately, on 10.3.2010, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, had passed the following order:- “Vide order dated November 3, 2009, Ms. Kanwaljit, Advocate, was appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court. Two time notice was sent to Ms. Kanwaljit, Advocate, but the same was not received back either served or unserved. Mr.Hargobinder Singh Gill, Advocate, is appointed as Amicus Curiae. The Registry is directed to supply paper book to the Amicus Curiae. Adjourned to 29.3.2010 for arguments”. Today, Mr. Hargobinder Singh Gill, Advocate, who was appointed as Amicus Curiae, is also not present. An adjournment has been sought on behalf of the Amicus Curiae but this Court cannot adjourn the revision petition which has been instituted in the year 2002. Therefore, this Court proceeds to decide the present revision petition. The trial Court, while passing an order of sentence, took into consideration the fact that the accused were facing ordeal of litigation since the year 1997. It further noticed that the accused had already Criminal Revision No. 1742 of 2002 3 remained in custody during trial ranging from one month to more than two months. The trial Court further noticed that two of the accused had since died, during the pendency of the case. A perusal of the age of the accused reveals that some of them are between 65 to 75 years and others are between 31 years to 55 years. The occurrence, in the present case, took place about 13 years ago. Since the State has not preferred any appeal for enhancement of sentence, in a revision filed by the complainant, this Court is hesitant to enhance the sentence awarded to the respondents/accused after eight years of the filing of revision petition, especially when the complainant has lost his interest in pursuing the present petition. In view of the above, no interference is warranted in the present petition and the same is hereby dismissed. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge March 29, 2010 “DK”