IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.1410 of 2011 (O & M) Date of Decision: September 14, 2011 Baljeet & another .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Haryana & another .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Arvind Bansal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Saini, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Jagi Ram Nain, Advocate, for respondent No.2. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. In an incident that occurred on 1.7.2004, the petitioners, so as to obstruct the possession of Palo (respondent No.2-complainant), hit the complainant on her head with Kassi, as a result of which she fell down. Sister of the complainant namely Shisho came to her rescue who was also given blows. On raising an alarm, Gopi and Kura Ram came to the spot. The accused fled. Crl. Rev. No.1410 of 2011 [2] While complainant-respondent No.2, Palo, was medico-legally examined, Shisho (sister of Palo) was not examined. 2. In a complaint case under Sections 323, 325, 506, 34 IPC, the petitioners have been convicted and sentenced as under:- “(a) Section 323 IPC read with Section 34 IPC: Rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of ` 300/- each; (b) Section 506 IPC read with Section 34 IPC: Rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of ` 300/- each. In default of paying fine, both the convicts shall undergo imprisonment further for a period of one month.” 3. The petitioners carried an appeal that has been dismissed vide impugned judgment dated 15.6.2011. Order of sentence has been maintained. 4. In the present revision petition, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the revision is not pressed on merits. The petitioners are first offenders and order of sentence be modified. The petitioners have already undergone more than one month of actual sentence and are ready and willing to compensate the injured by paying ` 25,000/- each. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that money has been brought in Court. Crl. Rev. No.1410 of 2011 [3] 6. Respondent No.2-complainant, Palo is present in Court, as identified by her lawyer Mr. Jagi Ram Nain, Advocate. A sum of ` 50,000/- has been given to Palo in Court. She accepts the money and contends that the petitioners may be released in view of the compensation received and the sentence already undergone by the petitioners. 7. In view of the above, this petition is dismissed, however, with modification in order of sentence to the effect that quantum of sentence is reduced to already undergone. (AJAI LAMBA) September 14, 2011 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?