SALEEM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Having perused the impugned judgments so also evidence of the prosecution including medical evidence, I am satisfied that the findings of conviction recorded by both the courts below do not suffer from any infirmity requiring interference in revisional jurisdiction.

(2.) At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the sentence awarded is required to be reduced by taking a lenient view.

(3.) Having heard the learned public prosecutor on this aspect also and from perusal of the record, I find that the dispute suddenly occurred and in that process the injuries happened to be sustained by the victims. However, in the totality of circumstances, in my view ends of justice would be met if the substantive sentence of imprisonment awarded to all the petitioners for the offence under Sec. 325 r/w Sec. 149 Penal Code is reduced from a period of three years to a period of one and half years while maintaining the substantive sentence under other offence so also the fine. Accordingly, the revision petition is partly allowed, while maintaining the conviction and sentence awarded to the petitioners under other offences, the substantive term of sentence awarded to the petitioners for the offence under Sec. 325 r/w Sec. 149 I.P.C. is reduced from a period of three years to a period of one and half years. Revision Partly allowed.