Crl.R. No.419 of 2004 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CASE NO.: Crl.R. No.419 of 2004 DATE OF DECISION: April 20, 2009 JAI BHAGWAN AND ANOTHER ...PETITIONERS VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA. PRESENT: MR. TAPAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONERS. MR. R.S. KUNDU, ADD.A.G., HARYANA. ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(ORAL) The petitioners were sent up by SHO Police Station Chhainsa to face trial under Section 186/353/332/506/34 IPC before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad. The allegations against them were that on 29.3.1996, Constable Abid Hussain and Constable Nirmal Singh were returning from their duties in the examination in School Charoda. Two of the accused, namely, Narender Singh and Jai Bhagwan told them that two students, Satender (boy) and Manju (girl) were going to appear in the 8th Class examination and that they should help the in copying the papers of the examination. On refusal of Constable Abid Hussain and Constable Nirmal Singh to allow the aforementioned students to copy in the examination, the accused Narender Singh and Jai Bhagwan threatened them with dire consequences and abused them by using filthy language. They were also given beatings with Dandas by Narender Singh and Jai Bhagwan who had come alongwith 4/5 boys. On seeing the beating a lot of people collected upon which the accused ran away from the spot. Crl.R. No.419 of 2004 -2- The Judicial Magistrate Ist Class after going through the entire evidence convicted the accused under Section 186/353/332 IPC and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for 1 month under Section 186 IPC and R.I. for 1 year under Section 353 and 332 IPC and also to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each under Section 332 IPC. In the appeal filed by the petitioners, the lower appellate Court set aside the conviction of the accused under Section 186, 353, and 506 IPC, but, however, maintained the sentence of the accused of R.I. for 1 year under Section 332 IPC. At the outset, counsel for the petitioner states that he does not wish to challenge the findings of the Courts below and as far as the conviction of the petitioners under Section 332 IPC is concerned, the submits that a lenient view be taken while sentencing the petitioners. A perusal of the judgements of both the Courts below shows that the occurrence took place on 29.3.1996, i.e. more than 13 years ago and as the petitioners have face a long and protracted trial, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in sending the petitioners in jail at this stage. In view of the above, while upholding the conviction of the petitioners under Section 332 IPC, I reduce the sentence to the one already undergone by them. Revision petition disposed of. April 20, 2009 (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) Gulati JUDGE