The court upheld the conviction under Section 325 IPC while emphasizing the importance of context and the nature of injuries for sentencing.

ORDER

The revision petitioners are convicted and sentenced by the courts below under Sections 323 and 325 read with Section 34 IPC .

2. Heard.

3. The courts below correctly appreciated the evidence and concurrently found that the revision petitioners committed the offence under Section 325 read with Section 34 IPC , rejecting the contentions of the revision petitioners. No material has been brought to the notice of this court to indicate that the appreciation of evidence or the concurrent finding of conviction by the courts below under read with Section 34 was perverse or incorrect. In the said circumstances, I find no reason to interfere with the verdict of conviction passed by the courts below under read with Section 34 .

4. In this case, there was only one victim who is PW1. Therefore, since the petitioners have been already convicted under Section 325 read with Section 34 IPC , no conviction under Section 323 read with Section 34 is warranted.

5. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners has pleaded for leniency in the matter of sentence. The incident was on 7-09-2008. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are neighbours of PW1 who is the injured in this case. The learned counsel has further submitted that the parties are presently residing peacefully and harmoniously. Therefore, if the petitioners are sent to jail, the petitioners and their family will be put to irreparable injury. No previous conviction has been proved against the revision petitioners. There is also no allegation that the revision petitioners are involved in any other offence of similar nature at any point of time.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case including the nature of injuries sustained by PW1, I am of the view that the sentence awarded by the courts below under Section 325 read with Section 34 IPC against the first petitioner can be modified and reduced to imprisonment till the rising of the court and a compensation of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) to PW1 under Section 357 (3) Cr.P.C. with a default clause for simple imprisonment for three months and the sentence awarded by the courts below against the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 can be modified and reduced to imprisonment till the rising of the Court and a compensation of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) each to PW1 under Section 357 (3) Cr.P.C. with a default clause for simple imprisonment for two months each to meet the ends of justice. It is ordered accordingly.

In the result, this Revision Petition stands allowed in part as above. The revision petitioners shall surrender before the trial Court on 20-2-2019 to suffer the sentence.

Dated this the 3^rd day of January, 2019. B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, ani/ JUDGE