Criminal Revision No. 82 of 1996 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No. 82 of 1996 Date of Decision: 23.4.2008 Kundan Singh and Others …Petitioners Versus State of Haryana …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. D.S.Pheruman, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Mehardeep Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, for the State. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. The present revision petition has been preferred on behalf of Kundan Singh, Partap Singh, Santokh Singh and Harvinder Singh. They were convicted and sentenced by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar, in case FIR No. 89 dated 135.1987 registered at Police Station Mehta, under Sections 326, 325, 323 & 34 IPC. Learned trial Court has awarded two years sentence and a fine of Rs.1,000/- each. In default of payment of fine, they were further ordered to undergo imprisonment for two months. Aggrieved against the same, petitioners had filed an appeal, which was decided by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Criminal Revision No. 82 of 1996 2 Amritsar who had dismissed the appeal. Mr. Pheruman, Advocate, appearing for the petitioners has stated that out of the four petitioners, two petitioners namely Kundan Singh and Partap Singh have died. Therefore, the present revision petition qua them shall abate. However, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar, is directed to hold a preliminary enquiry regarding the fact of death of petitioners Kundan Singh and Partap Singh. In case it is found that they have died, no reference is required to be made in this Court. However, in case it is found otherwise, this Court be informed. As per complainant Nazar Singh PW.1, his son Darbara Singh and his wife Piar Kaur were caused injuries by the accused. He has stated that Kundan Singh was armed with Sota and his two sons namely Partap Singh and Santokh Singh were armed with Kirpan and Harvinder Singh was armed with Sota. They had caused multiple injuries to the injured. Piar Kaur and Darbara Singh were medicolegally examined by PW.6 Dr. Deepak Walia who found the following injures on their persons:- “ Injuries on the person of Piar Kaur 1. An abrasion 5 cm X 1 cm on upper surface of left shoulder reddish cap was present on the injury; 2. An abrasion 9 cm X 1 cm on scapular region of right side of back reddish scap; 3. An abrasion 2 cm X 0.2 cm on back of the upper part of the right arm; Criminal Revision No. 82 of 1996 3 4. An abrasion 2 cm X 0.2 cm on the back of upper part of the right arm 1 cm below Injury No.3; 5. An abrasion 2 cm X 0.2 cm on lateral aspect of lumber region; 6. An incised wound 3 cm X 1 cm underlying bone cut. Cut is 3 cm in depth present on front and middle leg. 13 cm below Pibalet bersty; 7. An incised wound 4 cm X 0.5 cm 3 cm above injury No.6; 8. An incised wound 3 cm X 1 cm on front and lower part of left thigh. 11 cm from left knee; And 9. An incised wound 3 cm X .3 cm on lower part of left arm on is lateral 6 cm above left elbow”. “ Injuries on the body of Darbara Singh 1. An incised wound 9 cm X 1.5 cm an underlying bone was cut on the left frontal region of and fresh bleeding was present; 2. An incised wound 3 cm X 0.5 cm into muscle deep on palmer aspect of thumb of left arm; 3. An abrasion 1 cm long liner on the back of the index finger of left hand; Criminal Revision No. 82 of 1996 4 4. An incised would 4 cm X 1 cm into gone deep on front of right leg 2 cm below the terb arm; 5. An abrasion 1 cm X 0.5 cm on front and middle of the right leg; 6. An abrasion 0.5 cm 3 cm below the injury No.5; 7. An abrasion 2 cm X 0.2 cm on upper surface of right shoulder; 8. A contusion 5 cm X 4 cm on lateral surface of upper part of left arm; 9. A liner abrasion 6 cm long on the deltoic region of right arm; 10. A liner abrasion 8 cm long on right beltort region; And 11. ½ upper right incised tooth broken”. Darbara Singh is injured. He has appeared as PW.2. Number and nature of injuries in itself suggest that all the four accused had participated in the crime. Darbara Singh will be last person to absolve the accused. Furthermore, two Courts below have placed implicit reliance on the testimony of PW.1 Nazar Singh and PW.2 Darbara Singh. In a revisional Court, I cannot re-appreciate and re-evaluate their evidence. Mr. Pheruman, appearing for the appellants has stated that in the present case, occurrence pertains to May 1987.More than 21 years are going to lapse. It has been further stated that the complainant party Criminal Revision No. 82 of 1996 5 and accused party belong to the same village. In the last 21 years, no untoward incident has taken place. Therefore, sending the petitioners behind the bar after 21 years may not disturb the peace, which is prevailing in the village. It has been further stated that petitioners Santokh Singh and Harvinder Singh have undergone about one month of their actual sentence. I find no justification to send the petitioners behind the bars after 21 years of protracted trial. Therefore, the sentence of petitioners Santokh Singh and Harvinder Singh is reduced to already undergone, however, sentence of fine is enhanced qua each accused to Rs.15,000/-. They shall deposit the amount of fine within three months. Non-payment of fine shall render this revision petition as dismissed. With these observations, the present revision petition is disposed off. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge April 23, 2008 “DK”