Crl. Revision No. 46 of 2009 {1} In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Revision No. 46 of 2009 Date of Decision:April 16, 2009 Ranjit Singh and another ---Petitioners versus State of Punjab ---Respondent Coram: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA *** Present: Mr. Gurcharan Dass,Advocate, for the petitioners Mr. Aman Deep Singh Rai, AAG,Punjab *** SABINA, J. Petitioners were convicted for an offence under Sections 324, 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') vide judgment dated 4.4.2007 by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana. Vide order of even date passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana, petitioners were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 200/- each for offence under Section 324/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 100/- each for offence under Section 323/34 IPC. Both the sentences on Crl. Revision No. 46 of 2009 {2} both the petitioners are ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved by the same, petitioners preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge Fast Track Court, Ludhiana vide judgment dated 12.12.2008. Hence, the present revision petition. Prosecution story, in brief, as noticed by the learned Appellate Court in para 2 of its judgment, is as under:- “The facts of the case, as unfolded by the records are that on receipt of MLR on 3.8.1999 in the police station Dehlon. ASI Teja Singh went to PHC Dehlon, where doctor declared unfit to make statements of injured Ranjit Singh son of Achhra Singh and Lakhwinder Kaur wife of Ranjit Singh, residents of village Bool and again on 4.8.1999, ASI Gurnam Singh along with other police officials went to Primary Health Centre, Dehlon along with MLR bearing No. AL/2/99 with regard to injured Lakhwinder Kaur wife of Ranjit Singh son of Achhra Singh resident of village Bool and outside the Hospital, Ranjit Singh son of Achhra Singh met to ASI Gurnam Singh and he got recorded his statement with him to the effect that he is resident of above said village and he is an agriculturist. He further stated that his land is adjacent to Ranjit Singh and Gian Singh sons of Jhandha Singh who are belonging to their village. On 3.8.99 he along with his wife went towards their fields for cutting fodder at 7.00 AM and when he was coming back from his fields towards his house, then his wife was at the distance of 20-25 karams behind him. When he climbed from the side of Crl. Revision No. 46 of 2009 {3} village kand towards canal bridge, then at that time it was about 8.00 AM. Then near the canal, Ranjit Singh and Gian Singh of their village who were having weapons in their hands were standing there. He further stated that Ranjit Singh was having a gandasa in his hand and Gian Singh was having a Dangwala Sua. When they saw him, then Ranjit Singh raised a lalkara that he should run and today they will teach a lesson to cut the soil from their dividing line. Then Ranjit Singh gave a Gandasa blow on his head and thereafter another blow of Gandasa was also made by Ranjit Singh which hit on his forehead and the reverse side of that gandasa hit on the eye- brow of his left eye and then he raised hue and cry Marta Marta. On hearing his noise, his wife came to him, then Gian Singh gave a bodkin dang on his arm which hit on his right arm. On seeing him, Ranjit Singh gave a Gandassa blow on his wife and that blow hit on the head of his wife Lakhwinder Kaur and both of them raised hue and cry marta marta. On hearing their noise, his elder brother Tarsem Singh and Jaljit Singh, member Panchayat came there. Then Ranjit Singh gave reverse blow of his gandasa upon his left hand which hit on the thumb of his left hand and thereafter, both the above said accused persons ran away from the place of occurrence along with their respective weapons. After arrangement of vehicle, his brother Tarsem Singh got them admitted in Civil Hospital, Dehlon for their treatment. On 3.8.99 he and his wife remained unconscious and on 4.8.1999 he and his wife went to civil Crl. Revision No. 46 of 2009 {4} hospital, Ludhiana for X-ray examination and on 5.8.1999 doctor had discharged them and he sent his wife Lakhwinder Kaur to his village, so he got recorded his statement of the police. The bone of contention is that Ranjit Singh and Gian Singh sons of Jhandha Singh residents of village Bool asked him that he had erased soil and he encroached their land and extended his land from their side, so they had given injuries to them. He had heard the contents of his statement and after admitting it to be true he got appended his signature in Punjabi Language and the same was attested by ASI Gurnam Singh, police station, Dehlon on 5.8.1999. So, he requested that action be initiated against them as per law. So, ASI Gurnam Singh got registered a case against Ranjit Singh and Gian Singh sons of Jhandha Singh, resident of village Bool for commission of an offence punishable under section 323, 324 of the I.P.C. read with Section 34 of I.P.C., as he sent PHG Kashmira Singh to the police station Dehlon in this regard. The investigating officer ASI Gurnam Singh along with police officials accompanied by the complainant went to the place of occurrence and prepared site plan at the spot and recorded statements of witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 8.8.1999 accused were arrested in this case. After completion of other legal formalities challan against the accused was presented before the court for trial.” Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioner No. 1 Ranjit Singh is aged about 70 years whereas petitioner No. 2 is aged Crl. Revision No. 46 of 2009 {5} about 65 years. Learned counsel during the course of arguments has not challenged the conviction of the petitioners under Section 324, 323/34 IPC. Learned counsel has submitted that the sentence of imprisonment of the petitioners be reduced to already undergone by them. Petitioners are not previous convicts. As per the custody certificate of the petitioners placed on record by learned State counsel, petitioners have undergone actual sentence of 03 months and 11 days' as on 23.3.2009. There is no other case pending against the petitioners. Keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners, it is a fit case where the sentence of imprisonment is liable to be reduced to already undergone by the petitioners. Accordingly, conviction of the petitioners under Section 324, 323/34 IPC is maintained. However, sentence of imprisonment of the petitioners is reduced to already undergone by them. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (SABINA) JUDGE April 16, 2009 PARAMJIT