Crl. Revision No.2149 of 2004 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No.2149 of 2004 Date of Decision: April 29, 2010 Sucha Singh & Others ........Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ........Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Amandeep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab. SABINA, J. The petitioners were convicted for an offence under Sections 323, 326, 326 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') by learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Phillaur vide judgment dated 3.2.2003. Vide order of the even date, petitioner Resham Lal was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment thereof he shall further undergo R.I for three months under Section 326 IPC. Petitioners Sucha Singh & Raj Kumar were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- under Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC. All the petitioners were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months under Section 323 IPC. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved by the same, petitioners preferred appeal and the Crl. Revision No.2149 of 2004 2 same was dismissed with the modification by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jalandhar vide judgment dated 16.10.2004, whereby the appellants were acquitted under Sections under Sections 326/34 IPC and the accused/appellants were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months for offence under Section 324 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and the sentence under Section 323 was maintained. Hence, the present revision petition. The prosecution story in brief as noticed by the trial Court in para 2 of its judgment reads as under :- “The present case was registered on the basis of statement of complainant, Paramjit alias Pamma son of Chaman Lal dated 28.2.1998 to the effect that he is resident of village Dosanjh Kalan P.S. Goraya, Distt. Jalandhar and he is serving in the S.T.D. At Phagwara- Banga Road. He further submitted that on 25.2.1998 he along with his friend namely Surjit son of Ramesh Lal went to village Dosanjh Kalan in the house of their friend Kulwinder alias Binda on the scooter. He sent Surjit inside the house of his friend and he remained present outside the house. He further submitted that meanwhile Kala alias Resham Lal son of Mohan lal was standing in front of the gurdwara in the deori. Kala alias Resham Lal called him and he caught hold him with his shirt and he also started abusing him. He further deposed that Sucha brother of Resham Lal also came there armed with dang and he gave his dasti dang Crl. Revision No.2149 of 2004 3 below which hit on his right shoulder and elder brother of Resham Lal namely Raj Kumar also came there armed with a brick and he gave the injuries to him. Rsham Lal brought a kirpan and gave him kirpan blows. He raised the noise for help and on hearing the noise, Rajinder Paul, Surjit and Binda came at the spot and rescued him from the clutches of accused. On the basis of this statement, an F.I.R. under Sections 324, 323 read with Section 34 IPC was registered against the accused. Statement of witnesses were also recorded. Site plan was also prepared at the spot. On completion of all the necessary formalities, the challan was presented before the court.” During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners has not challenged the conviction of the petitioners under Sections 323, 324/34 of IPC, but has submitted that the sentences qua imprisonment of the petitioners be reduced to already undergone by them. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that the petitioners are facing the criminal proceedings since the year 1998. They are the only bread earner of their family. Fine has already been deposited by the petitioners. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case and submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, it would be just and expedient to reduce the sentences qua imprisonment of the petitioners to already undergone by them. Accordingly, the conviction of the petitioners under Sections 323, Crl. Revision No.2149 of 2004 4 324/34 IPC is maintained. However, the sentences qua imprisonment of the petitioners is reduced to already undergone by them. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. (SABINA) April 29, 2010 JUDGE Anand