TEJA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DARSHAN Singh and Teja Singh were tried, convicted and sentenced as under by the trial Magistrate :-

(2.) DARSHAN Singh petitioner is the son of Teja Singh petitioner. Both of them are alleged to have caused injuries to Nachhattar Singh PW on 5th June, 1983, at about 7 p.m. Both were allegedly armed with gandasas. Nachattar Singh PW was medically examined by Dr. Vijay Kumar PW1 who found the following injuries on his person :-

(3.) I agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner that keeping in view the medical evidence in the case the charge under section 326 or 326/34 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be sustained. Consequently, Darshan Singh petitioner is acquitted of the charge under section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and Teja Singh is acquitted of the charge under section 326/34 of the Penal Code. However, the conviction of Teja Singh under section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and that of Darshan Singh under section 324/34 of the Indian Penal Code is maintained. Since both the petitioners are first offenders I think that the ends of justice would be amply met if they are given the benefit of the Probation of Offenders Act. Consequently, I suspend the sentence of imprisonment of both the petitioners and order that they be released on probation on their furnishing within two months to the satisfaction of the trial Court a bond in the sum of three thousand rupees with one surety in the like amount to keep the peace and be of good behavior for a period of one year and to receive the sentence when called upon to do so in the meantime. However, each one of the petitioners would pay Rs. 1,500 payable as compensation to Nachhattar Singh injured. The fine already recovered would be adjusted towards the compensation. If the compensation is not paid within two months, the petitioners would be called upon to serve the sentence under sections 324 and 324/34 of the Indian Penal Code. However, in view of section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act, no disqualification would be incurred by the petitioners due to this conviction. But for this modification this revision petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Revision dismissed.