BALWAN SINGH & ANR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this criminal revision petition is to the judgment dated 14.12.2005 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioners challenging their conviction and sentences for the offences punishable under Sections 186, 332 and 353, IPC, recorded by learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Loharu, was dismissed.

(2.) At the very outset learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in view of the well-reasoned judgments of both the Courts below, he does not want to challenge the conviction of the petitioners. However, he submits that the occurrence had taken place on 29.06.1998; the petitioners remained on bail during pendency of trial, appeal and the present revision petition but they did not misuse the said concession; the occurrence had taken place when the informant/complainant had gone to the village of the petitioners for recovery of loan disbursed to the family members of the petitioners; not even a single injury was received by the aggrieved persons; the only allegation was that the aggrieved persons were physically thrashed and their dresses were torn; none of the petitioners is a previous convict and that the petitioners have already suffered the agony of trial/appeal and the present revision petition for more than 17 years. He also points out that the petitioners have also suffered incarceration for 24 days each and that the fine imposed by learned trial Court was deposited by the petitioners before learned trial Court.

(3.) In view of the above, he prays for releasing the petitioners on probation. To buttress his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on a judgment delivered by this Court in the matter of Ved Parkash vs. State of Punjab, 2003 2 RCR(Cri) 823.