IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Revision No.1282 of 2011 DATE OF DECISION : SEPTEMBER 8, 2011 PARVINDER SINGH ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. Daldeep Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. Manoj Bajaj, Addl.AG, Punjab. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) 1 This revision petition is directed against judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 5.10.2010, recorded by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Bathinda, vide which conviction of the petitioner has been recorded for commission of offences under Sections 325 and 323, Indian Penal Code, and he has been sentenced as below:- Under Section 325, Indian Penal Code Rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of ` 1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only); in default of payment of fine simple imprisonment for 15 days Under Section 323, Indian Penal Code Rigorous imprisonment for six months and fine of ` 500/- (Rupees Five hundred only); in default of payment of fine simple imprisonment for 15 days Criminal Revision No.1282 of 2011 2 2 The appellate court viz. Sessions Judge, Bathinda, in appeal, vide judgment dated 19.5.2011, upheld the judgment of conviction, however, order of sentence was modified and the petitioner was sentenced as below:- Under Section 325, Indian Penal Code Rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of ` 1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only); in default of payment of fine simple imprisonment for 15 days Under Section 323, Indian Penal Code Rigorous imprisonment for six months and fine of ` 500/- (Rupees Five hundred only); in default of payment of fine simple imprisonment for 15 days 3 Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the revision petition is not pressed against judgment of conviction. Order of sentence, however, be modified considering various factors such as the incident took place on account of a trivial issue viz. nephew of complainant-Balwinder Kaur was sitting outside the bathroom for urinating. In the meantime, Surjeet Singh, Parvinder Singh (petitioner), who was armed with a stick, and Charno Kaur came there and had an altercation. Petitioner gave a blow with stick on the head of the complainant and another blow of stick on the shoulder. On receiving the injuries, the complainant fell down on the ground. Another injury was given by the petitioner on the knee. Surjeet Singh has been released on probation and Charno Kaur has been acquitted by the lower appellate court. 4 The injury received by the injured/complainant is dislocation of her shoulder joint. As per PW-3 Dr. I.B. Aggarwal, Criminal Revision No.1282 of 2011 3 dislocation could be due to twisting or by fall. It also stands established that the accused and the complainant are neighbors. 5 Considering the various aspects of the case, in my considered opinion, ends of justice would be met if the petitioner is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for commission of offence under Section 325, Indian Penal Code and fine of ` 10,000/- which, on recovery, would be payable to the injured (in default, simple imprisonment for three months). Petitioner is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for commission of offence under Section 323, Indian Penal Code. The sentence of fine is maintained. 6 With the above modification in the order of sentence, the revision petition stands disposed of. September 8, 2011 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?