In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Revision No. 3322 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision:February 01, 2010 Amrik Singh ---Petitioner versus State of Punjab ---Respondent Coram: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH *** Present: Mr.Deepak Agnihotri, Advocate, for Mr. P.S.Sekhon, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Anter Singh Brar, Sr. Deputy Advocate General, Punjab *** GURDEV SINGH, J. Crl. Misc. No. 65494 of 2009 Heard. Delay in filing the revision is condoned. Crl. Revision No. 3322 of 2009(O&M) Heard. This revision has been preferred by Amrik Singh-petitioner- accused, against the judgment dated 18.7.2009 passed by learned additional Sessions Judge (Ad hoc), Sangrur, dismissing the appeal filed by the present petitioner and his co-accused against the judgment dated 4.5.2004 passed by SDJM, Dhuri, maintaining their conviction under Section 323, Crl. Revision No. 3322 of 2009 (O&M) -2- 326/34 of the Indian Penal Code(hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) and reducing the sentence of imprisonment from rigorous imprisonment of two years to rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 326 IPC in respect of present petitioner and from rigorous imprisonment for one years to rigorous imprisonment for six months in respect of the other accused under Section 323 IPC. At the time of admission of the revision, it was submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that this revision is being pressed only regarding the sentence of imprisonment and not regarding the conviction recorded by the trial court. It has been submitted by him that this petitioner has already undergone sentence of imprisonment for 07 months and 18 days. The interest of justice will be served in case the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon him is further reduced to already undergone. Accordingly, the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to already undergone. It was submitted by the learned State counsel that this petitioner had caused grievous hurt to Dyal Kaur- complainant, who had borne expenses for her treatment and that the petitioner be directed to compensate her suitably. The interest of justice will be served in case the complainant -injured is suitably compensated by the petitioner, who succeeded to go away with lesser sentence of imprisonment. Accordingly, he is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 25,000/- as compensation to the complainant-injured for the injuries caused by him. Revision petition is disposed of accordingly. (GURDEV SINGH) JUDGE February 01, 2010 PARAMJIT