The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of trial delays in reducing the sentence and the application of Section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for compensating the victims.

S.S. Saron, J. - This revision has been filed against the order dated 18.09.1990 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, whereby, the appeal against the order of the learned Trial Magistrate dated 07.02.1989 has been dismissed with the modification in the quantum of sentence. The learned Trial Magistrate had Section 148 Indian Penal Code (for short Indian Penal Code). Thereafter, separate sentences were passed against the petitioners for the offences attributable to them sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment, maximum for three years, besides other sentences as attributed to them. The sentences were, however, to run concurrently. The fine of Rs. 7,500/- was paid. In appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge reduced the sentence to one and half years (18 months) for the offence under Section 326/149 Indian Penal Code. The said order dated 18.09.1990 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, as already noticed, is assailed in this appeal.

2. Shri H.S. Gill, learned senior counsel appearing with Shri R.K. Dhiman, advocate for the petitioner after arguing their case for some time on merits and realizing that he would not be able to convince the court on the order of they being found guilty, confined his argument to the quantum of sentence only. He has contended that in view of the long lapse of time i.e. 16 and half years from the date of occurrence, the sentence imposed on the petitioners is liable to be reduced to that already undergone by them. This is more so in view of the fact that the entire family of the petitioners has been convicted, inasmuch as four of the petitioners are brothers and 5th petitioner, namely Swaran Singh is their father and, therefore also the sentence of imprisonment is liable to be reduced.

3. In response, Shri S.S. Randhawa, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab appearing for the respondent-State has contended that the petitioners committed a serious crime and they have caused substantial injuries of the persons of Mohan Singh, Dial Singh and Sukhjinder Singh, which has been noticed in the impugned judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, therefore, the sentence imposed upon them is not liable to be reduced as is prayed for by the learned senior counsel appearing for them.

4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the respective contentions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

5. It is not in dispute that the occurrence in the present case took place about 16 and half years back. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that in this span of 16 and half years, the petitioners have not committed any crime and they have maintained peace. They were granted the concession of bail by this court on 28.09.1990 and during the period they were released on bail, they did not do anything which would show that they are liable to be sent to jail. In Basant Singh v. State of Punjab, 2000(4) RCR (Crl.) 578, this court in a case relating to offence under Sections 326 and 323 Indian Penal Code, where the accused had faced trial for 16 years, reduced the sentence to that already undergone. Reliance was placed on an earlier decision of this court in Sawinder Singh v. State of Punjab, 2000(1) RCR (Crl.) 163. In Sajjan Singh and another v. State of Punjab, 2003(3) RCR (Crl.) 182, where the accused had been convicted for the offences under Sections 326 and 325 Indian Penal Code, this court reduced the sentence to that already undergone as the matter was 17 years old.

6. In the case in hand, the injury on the person of Mohan Singh is on the left fore-arm, which is of grievous nature. Deol Singh, injured has suffered 15 injuries, which all are simple in nature. Sukhjinder Singh, the other injured suffered 10 injuries and injury Nos. 5 and 10 on his person were grievous in nature. Injury No. 5 is on the back of left fore-arm and injury No. 10 is on the left varietal region. The other injuries are simple in nature.

7. Keeping in