Criminal Revision No.293 of 1994 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.293 of 1994 Date of decision: February 13, 2008 Amarjit Singh and others … Petitioners Versus State of Punjab … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. B.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Mehardeep Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the State. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) Mr. B.S. Sidhu appearing for the petitioners has stated that the petitioners were tried in case FIR No.111 dated 19.03.1989 registered at Police Station Sadar, Malout under Section 326, 324 and 34 IPC. It is stated that petitioners were convicted and sentenced by the Court of Judicial Magistrate (1st Class), Mukatsar and were awarded sentences as under: Name of accused Offence Sentence Surjit Singh 326 IPC RI for two years and a fine of Rs.2000/-. In default of payment of fine further RI for one month. Criminal Revision No.293 of 1994 2 Surjit Singh 324/34 IPC RI for 6 months and a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine further RI for 15 days for causing simple hurt to Ranjit Singh. Surjit Singh 324/34 IPC RI for 6 months and a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine further RI for 15 days for causing simple hurt to Karnail Singh. Amarjit Singh 326/34 IPC RI for two years and a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine further RI for month. Amarjit Singh 324/ IPC RI for 6 months and a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, further RI for 15 days for causing simple hurt to Ranjit Singh. Amarjit Singh 324 IPC RI for 6 months and a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, further RI for 15 days for causing simple hurt to Karnail Singh. Kaka Singh 326/34 IPC RI for two years and fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine further RI for one month. Kaka Singh 324 IPC RI for six months and a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine further RI for 15 days for causing simple hurt to Ranjit Singh. Kaka Singh 324/34 IPC RI for six months and a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine further RI for 15 days for causing simple hurt to Ranjit Singh. It is further stated that the Sessions Judge, Faridkot acquitted the petitioners for the offence under Section 326 IPC. It will be apposite here to reproduce para 13 of the judgment of Sessions Judge, Faridkot: “13. For the reasons given above, this appeal stands partly accepted and is partly accepted. Conviction of Surjit Singh u/s 326 I.P.C. is set aside. Conviction of Amarjit Singh Criminal Revision No.293 of 1994 3 and Kaka Singh under Section 326/34 IPC is also set aside. Amarjit Singh is convicted u/s 324 I.P.C. Kaka Singh is convicted u/s 324 I.P.C. While Surjit Singh is convicted u/s 324/34 I.P.C. Although Amarjit Singh is guilty of having caused simple injuries with sharp edged weapon to Ranjit Singh and Karnail Singh and is guilty u/s 324 I.P.C. on more than one account, he is sentenced u/s 324 I.P.C. only on one count. Although Kaka Singh is guilty of having caused simple injuries with sharp edged weapon to Ranjit Singh and Karnail Singh and is guilty u/s 324 I.P.C. on more than one count, he is sentenced u/s 324 IPC only on one count.” Having acquitted the petitioners for the offences under Section 326, petitioners were sentenced to 6 months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2000/-. Mr. B.S. Sidhu appearing for the petitioners has stated that in the present case, occurrence has taken place on 18th March, 1989. A period of about 20 years is going to elapse. Mr.Sidhu has further stated at bar that petitioners have undergone about one month and 22 days after their appeal was dismissed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Faridkot. Thus, Mr.Sidhu contends that the petitioners have undergone about one month and 22 days of their actual sentence of six months. Mr.Sidhu has further stated at bar that in the last 20 years no untoward incident has taken place and petitioners have not committed any offence. In the present case, Ranjit Singh PW-1 and Karnail Singh PW-2 were the two injured witnesses. Since they suffered injuries in the occurrence, their presence is not disputed. Injured person will be the last person to substitute any accused. Mr.Sidhu has stated that since the testimony of these two witnesses has been relied upon by the two courts Criminal Revision No.293 of 1994 4 below and two courts have found that their testimony is without any blemish, he will not be able to assail findings of fact in a revisional Court. However, taking into consideration that the petitioners had only been convicted under Section 324 IPC and had been awarded six months sentence and they have undergone about one month and 22 days and occurrence pertains to the year 1989, petitioners have suffered a protracted trial and their antecedents are such that they have committed no offence in the last 20 years, I am of the view that sending the petitioners behind the bars at this stage, especially when no untoward incident has taken place, may disturb peace and harmony prevailing in the village. Taking into account totality of circumstances, sentence of petitioners is reduced to already undergone. However, sentence of fine is enhanced from Rs.2000/- to Rs.5000/ qua each petitioner. Petitioners will be entitled to deduction of amount of fine already paid. Non deposit of fine by the petitioners shall be considered as dismissal of present revision petition. [Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia] Judge February 13, 2008. rps