Criminal Revision No.80 of 2005 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.80 of 2005 Date of Decision : 19.11.2010 Mange and others ...... Petitioners VERSUS State of Haryana ...... Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.S.P.Chahar, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.J.S.Rattu, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, for the respondent-State. ***** A.N.JINDAL, J: This petition is directed against the judgment dated 13.10.2004, passed by the first Appellate Court, dismissing the appeal of the accused- petitioners (herein referred as 'the accused'), against the judgment dated 09.07.1999, passed by Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jhajjar, convicting and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each under Section 324/34 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each for the offence under Sections 325/34 and 452/34 IPC (on each count) and rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- under Section 326/34 IPC. The case was registered on the statement of complainant Brahama Nand (herein referred as 'the complainant'), who disclosed before ASI Narain Singh that on 30.10.1988 at about 8:30 p.m., when he and his aunt Khazani (PW5) were cutting the fodder in their house, his brother Om Criminal Revision No.80 of 2005 2 Parkash (PW1) arrived there. He sat with his brother for inhaling huqqa. Thereafter, he again started cutting fodder. In the meanwhile, Raj Kumar and Mange armed with “farsas” in their hands and accused Dhare armed with stick tresspassed into their house and exhorted that they would teach a lesson to Om Parkash for helping Ranbir in the criminal case between Ranbir and Dhare. Thereafter, Raj Kumar inflicted a “farsa” blow on the left leg of Om Parkash; appellant Mange inflicted a “farsa” blow on his back; Raj Kumar inflicted a “farsa” blow on his left thumb and Dhare inflicted stick blows on his back and left thigh. On raising hue and cry by Brahama Nand and Khazani, the accused persons fled away. Om Parkash was shifted to Civil Hospital, Beri where he was treated and medico legally examined. He was also radiologically examined. On completion of investigation, challan against the accused was presented in the Court. Finding a prima facie case, they were charged under Sections 452, 323, 324, 325, 326 read with Section 34 IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and opted to contest. The prosecution, in order to substantiate the charges, examined as many as six witnesses. In their statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused denied all the allegations and pleaded their innocence. However, no evidence was led in defence. The trial resulted into conviction. The appeal, preferred by them, was also dismissed. It is significant to mention here that earlier the accused were convicted and sentenced vide judgment dated 25.02.1995. However, in appeal, the Appellate Court vide judgment dated 03.04.1999 had remitted Criminal Revision No.80 of 2005 3 the case back with a direction to cure the defect in the statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. After complying with the directions as given in the remand order, the trial Court again convicted and sentenced them and their appeal was again dismissed. Arguments heard. Record perused. The conviction, recorded by both the Courts below, is based on the testimonies of complainant Brahama Nand (PW2) and Om Parkash injured (PW1). Both are quite consistent in their statements with regard to time, place and the manner in which the occurrence took place. Even Smt.Khazani (PW5), who was also present at the time of occurrence, narrated the same version while testifying that when Brahama Nand (PW2) was cutting the fodder in the courtyard, Om Parkash (PW1) came whereupon Brahama Nand (PW2) filled huqqa for him then both of them started inhaling it. In the meantime, Mange, Raj Kumar and Dhare came with the weapons like farsas and stick respectively and caused injuries to Om Parkash. She has described the part attributed to each of the accused at the time of occurrence. The testimonies of aforesaid three witnesses stand corroborated by medical evidence of Dr.R.B.S.Jakhar (PW3) and Dr.A.S.Gulia (PW4), who medically and radiologically examined the injured Om Parkash. Investigating Officer has also given all the minute details of the investigation conducted by him. No enmity of the complainant or the witnesses with the accused has been alleged, therefore, no false implication is possible. There is no inordinate delay in lodging the FIR and the delay if any, stands explained. The ocular version fits in with the medical evidence. No plausible defence has been led. Criminal Revision No.80 of 2005 4 Faced with the situation, learned counsel for the petitioners has urged that both Mange and Dhare are sufficiently old, therefore, some leniency could be shown on the quantum of sentence. Having pondered over the aforesaid contentions, it may be observed that the occurrence took place on 30.10.1988, therefore, the sword of sentence remained hanging over their heads for the last twenty two years. All the accused have already undergone six months and twenty five days of the substantive sentence and they have deposited the fine also. Keeping in view the longevity of the trial and the fact that earlier before remand by the Court of Sessions, the accused were convicted by the trial Court and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC, this Court finds justification to reduce the sentence to one year. In the wake of aforesaid discussion, this petition is dismissed with the modification in the sentence which is reduced to one year under Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC without any alteration in the sentence of fine. However, the sentence awarded for the other offences shall remain intact. All the sentences shall run concurrently. (A.N.Jindal) Judge 19.11.2010 mamta-II