Surjit Singh, Harnek Singh, Nirmal Singh, Gurcharan Singh and Harbans Singh vs State of Punjab

R.L. Anand, J.—This is a criminal revision and has been directed against the judgment dated 30.9.1991 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Faridkot, who maintained the conviction of the petitioners, under Sections 148 326/149 325/149 and 324/149 IPC. All the petitioners were sentenced to undergo RI for 6 months each u/s 148 IPC. Petitioner Harbans Singh was sentenced to undergo RI for 1 years and to pay a fine of Rs 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for three months u/s 326 IPC. Petitioners Surjit Singh, Harnek Singh, Nirmal Singh and Gurcharan Singh were sentenced to undergo RI for 9 months each u/s 326/149 IPC. Further, petitioners Harnek Singh, Harbans Singh, Nirmal Singh and Gurcharan Singh were sentenced to under RI for 9 months each and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 3 months each u/s 325 IPC and petitioner Surjit Singh was sentenced to undergo RI for six months u/s 325/149 IPC. Petitioner Surjit Singh was sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months u/s 324 IPC and remaining petitioners i.e. Harbans Singh, Harnek Singh, Nirmal Singh and Gurcharan Singh were sentenced to undergo RI for 3 months each u/s 324/149 IPC. The leaned Sessions Judge also directed that all the substantive sentences shall run concurrently and out of the fine, if recovered, 2/3rd shall go to Ajmer Singh and 1/3rd to Natha Singh.

The facts of this case have been given in the impugned judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge and I need not repeat in the present judgment. While maintaining the conviction of the petitioners, the learned Appellate court has mainly relied upon the statements of the injured witnesses besides medical evidence and rightly too, therefore, there is no scope of interference so far as the conviction of the petitioners for the various offences quoted above is concerned.

So far as the substantive sentence is concerned, it is hereby reduced to six months u/s 326 and 326/149 IPC vis-a-vis each of the petitioners. Similarly the sentences u/s 325 and 325/149 IPC is hereby reduced to four months. The sentence awarded u/s 324 and 324/149 IPC stands reduced to two months. All the sentences shall run concurrently. The sentence of the petitioner u/s 148 IPC is, however, maintained. The sentence of fine is also maintained. The fine, is realised, shall be disbursed in the manner as ordered by the learned Sessions Judge in the impugned judgment dated 30.3.1991.

With this modification in the matter of sentence, the revision stands disposed of.