RAM SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this Criminal Revision Petition is to the judgement dated 20.08.2003, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa, whereby appeal filed by the petitioners challenging their conviction and sentence for the offence punishable under Section 323 read with Section 34 and Section 326 read with Section 34, IPC, recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sirsa, was dismissed. Ms. Divya Godara, learned counsel for petitioner No. 1 and Mr. Radhe Shyam Sharma, learned counsel for petitioners No. 2 and 3, at the very outset, submit that in view of the fact that both the Courts below have maintained the conviction of the petitioners, therefore, they do not want to argue the present Criminal Revision Petition on merits. However, there are fairly arguable points so far as sentence is concerned. To support their contention they have raised following arguments:-

(2.) Learned counsel for the State has produced the affidavits of Superintendent Jail, Sirsa, showing the period of incarceration suffered by each petitioner which are taken on record.

(3.) The prosecution examined the following witnesses:- PW-1 Chet Ram-injured, he supported the prosecution version. He reiterated the version as he disclosed to the police; PW-2 Duli Chand, he is a son of the complainant and he narrated about the incident being an eye witness; PW-3 Head Constable, Om Parkash had investigated the case; PW-4 Dr. S.C. Mehta had medico-legally examined Chet Raminjured and he found as many as three injuries on the person of Chet Ram. On the basis of X-ray report, he declared injury No. 1 to be grievous in nature.