Criminal Revision No.511 of 1992 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No.511 of 1992 Date of Decision: 26.2.2008. Hardial Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. J.S.Chahal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Mehardeep Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, for the State. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. This revision petition has been preferred by Hardial Singh son of Dharam Singh. He was tried along with Gurcharan Singh and Satpal in case FIR No. 276 dated 14.12.1987 registered at Police Station Pathankot under Section 326, 323 read with Section 34 IPC. In the present case,FIR was lodged on the statement of Harbans Lal who has stated he is resident of Gandhi Nagar, Pathankot, along with his brother Ramesh Chander. It has been stated that he had taken on rent a Kiosk from accused Hardial Singh and was doing the work of Motor Mechanic. About two years ago, Hardial Singh had told him to vacate the Kiosk but he has obtained a stay order from the Court Criminal Revision No.511 of 1992 2 and Hardial Singh had filed an appeal against the said order. He has further stated that on 14.12.1987 at about 4.00 P.M. when he was present in his Kiosk, Hardial Singh armed with kirpan, and his younger brother Gurcharan Singh armed with iron rod and his brother Satpal who was working as Tailor Master was armed with hockey stick came there. He has stated that Hardial Singh raised a lalkara upon which Gurcharan Singh gave a blow of iron rod on his right bicep. Satpal gave a hockey blow which hit in his right foot. He raised noise to save himself then Janak Raj, Driver of Jeep No. PUG-301, was attracted to the spot. Hardial Singh gave a kirpan blow which hit on the head of Janak Raj and his little finger of the right hand. The entire occurrence was witnessed by Uttam Chand and his servant Surinder Kumar. Prosecution presented the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. and charges were framed. Petitioner along with his co-accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Dr. Jaswant Singh, who appeared as PW.5 found two following injuries on the person of Harbans Lal:- “1. Abrasion 1 cm X ½ CM on the right upper arm. 2. Diffused swelling with pain on the left upper arm. Advised X-ray right arm”. Both the injuries were declared simple. Dr. Jaswant Singh, PW.5, also examined PW.2 Janak Raj and following two injuries were found on his person:- “1. Incised wound 10 CM long X 1 cm into cutting the bone of skull running from the Criminal Revision No.511 of 1992 3 forehead to the middle of head about 7 cm from the left ear lobe. Advised X-ray skull. 2. Incised wound 1 cm X ¼ cm on the back of little finger of right hand”. Injury No.1 on the person of Janak Raj was declared grievous. PW.4 Dr. G.L.Kukreja had declared injured Janak Raj to be unfit to make statement on 17.12.1987. Learend trial Court convicted and sentenced Hardial Singh, Gurcharan Singh and Satpal as under:- S.No. Name of accused Sentenced under Section and period of sentence 1 Hardial Singh a) R.I. for two years and a fine of Rs.2000/- under Section 326 of the IPC. In default of payment of fine further R.I. for six months. b) R.I. for six months and a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC. In default of payment of fine further R.I. for three months. 2 Gurcharan Singh a) R.I. for two years and a fine of Rs.2000/- under Section 326 read with Section 34 of the IPC. In default of payment of fine further R.I. for six months. b) R.I. for six months and a fine of Rs.500- under Section 323 of the IPC. In default of payment of fine further R.I. for three months. Criminal Revision No.511 of 1992 4 S.No. Name of accused Sentenced under Section and period of sentence 3 Sat Pal a) R.I. for two years and a fine of Rs.2000/- under Section 326 read with Section 34 of the IPC. In default of payment of fine further R.I. for six months. b) R.I. for six months and a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC. In default of payment of fine, further R.I. for three months. Aggrieved against the same, appeal was filed. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur, acquitted Gurcharan Singh and Satpal for the offence under Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC and convicted them only under Section 323 IPC and reduced their sentence to already undergone. However, sentence of Hardial Singh was maintained. Therefore, the present revision petition has been preferred only on behalf of Hardial Singh. Mr. J.S.Chahal, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner has very fairly stated that since both Harbans Lal PW.1 and Janak Raj PW.2 were injured and there is head injury on PW.2, which was grievous in nature, therefore, he will not be in a position to assail the testimony of witnesses. Two Courts below have placed implicit reliance on the testimony of PW.1 Harbans Lal and PW.2 Janak Raj, injured and found their evidence as trustworthy. Injured-witnesses are the last persons to absolve the real offender. They have deposed in unanimous against the present petitioner and both the Courts below have relied upon their testimony. Criminal Revision No.511 of 1992 5 Therefore, this Court cannot re-appreciate and re-evaluate the evidence. At this stage, Mr. Chahal has submitted that since the occurrence pertains to December 1987, petitioner has suffered a protracted trial of more than 20 years. It has been further stated that in the head note of judgement of trial Court, age of the petitioner was recorded as 35 years. Now he is aged about 55 years and no useful purpose will be served by sending him behind the bars. It has been further stated that petitioner was arrested on 18.12.1987 and was released on bail on 13.1.1988 and he has undergone about one month as under-trial. Thereafter, petitioner remained, after dismissal of appeal and till grant of bail by this Court, in custody for 22 days and thus, he has undergone about one month and 22 days, out of one year of his actual sentence behind the bars. It has been further stated that in the last 20 years, parties are living in complete peace and petitioner has committed no other offence. Taking into account above said submissions, sentence of petitioner is reduced to already undergone. However, sentence of fine is enhanced to Rs.10,000/-, which shall be paid in the Court within three months. Non-deposit of fine shall be deemed as dismissal of present revision petition. With these modifications, the present revision petition is disposed off. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge February 26, 2008 “DK”