SURJIT SINGH Vs. PREM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PREM Singh along with three other accused, namely, Gurmail Singh, Kewal Singh mid Surjit Kaur was brought to trial for the offences under sections 326/325/ 323 read with section 34, Indian Penal Code, before the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana and they were held guilty thereof. PREM Singh was convicted under section 326, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to 2 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/- while the other aforementioned three accused were convicted under section 326/34, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to one years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/- each. PREM Singh was further convicted under sections 325 and 323, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to 11/2 years rigorous imprisonment under the first count and 6 months rigorous imprisonment under the second count and the other three accused were convicted under sections 325/34 and 323, Indian Penal Code and each of them was sentenced to one years rigorous imprisonment under the first count and 6 months rigorous imprisonment under the second count with the direction that all the substantive sentences so awarded to them shall run concurrently. On appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, set aside their convictions under sections 326 and 326/34, Indian Penal Code and instead convicted them under section 324 read with section 34, Indian Penal Code. There convictions under the ancillary offences were, however, maintained. While setting aside the sentences of imprisonment awarded to the respondents he, however, ordered them to be released on probation for a period of 2 years to keep the peace and be of good behaviour. PREM Singh and his two sons Gurmail Singh and Kewal Singh were, however, ordered to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 1200/- as detailed in paragraph No.7 of the judgment to Surjit Singh, Han Singh and Malkiat Kaur, P.Ws., besides ordering them to pay Rs. 400/towards the costs of the proceedings. Feeling aggrieved, Surjit Singh complainant has come up in revision. At the stage of preliminary hearing, notice regarding compensation only was issued by K.P.S. Sandhu, J., on August 8, 1984.

(2.) THE main plank of argument advanced on behalf of the petitioner is that the accused respondents were not entitled to any relief of probation and the amount of Rs. 1200/- awarded to the injured witnesses as compensation was too meagre keeping in view the number and nature of injuries sustained by the three witnesses, I enhance the amount of compensation from Rs. 1200/- to Rs. 1700/- to be distributed amongst the injured witnesses in equal shares. THE order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, is modified to this extent only and the revision petition stands disposed of accordingly.