Raja Afrasiah Khan, J.- The petitioners Muhammad Aslam, Ahmad Khan, Atta Muhammad and Abdul have moved this criminal revision petition under section 439 Cr.P.C, against their conviction and sentence. The learned Magistarate 1st Class Shahpur convicted the petitioners under sections 452/323/34 P.P.C, and sentenced them to undergo R,I. For four months plus a fine of Rs.100/- each under each count and in defauIt thereof to suffer R.I. For one month further. It was directed that if the fine is realised, a sum of Rs.200/- shall be given to the complainant as compensation under section 544-A Cr.P.C. The petitioners went in appeal which was heard and dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Sargodha on 12.8.1979.
2. Briefly stated the facts are that a criminal complain under section 452/307/34 P.P.C, was instituted before the learned trial Court on 2.6.1977 alleging that the complainant Khuda Yar was sleeping in his dera at lsha prayer time on 31.7.1977. The petitioners while armed with sticks scaled over the wall and entered the dera of the complainant. The petitioners inflicted injuries with their weapons on the person of the complainant. On an alarm being raised by the complainant, Mukhtar and Muhammad Nawaz P.Ws came at the spot and rescued him. The motive for the commission of the crime is that on the day of occurrence at about 'rotiwela' the complainant was busy in irrigating his fields while Aslam petitioner came at the spot and diverted the flow of water towards his own fields and further hurled abuses upon the complainant, who returned the same, whereupon the said petitioner went back after throwing a challenge to him. The complainant produced medical certificate Ex.PB showing injuries on his person. The prosecution in order to prove its case produced Khuda Yar complainant, P.W1, Muhammad Mukhtar P.W2, Muhammad Nawaz P.W3, and. Dr. Asghar Nawaz P.W4.
3. The petitioners while making statements under section 342 Cr.P.C, denied the allegations levelled against them and produced Muhammad Afzal D.W1 and Muhammad Ramzan D.W2 in their defence.4. At the very outset, the learned counsel did not challenge the conviction and instead requested that the sentence of the petitioners might be reduced to the period already undergone by them. In this connection, he stated that the petitioner suffered in jail 35 days. The commission of the crime has been proved by the prosecution beyond any shadow of doubt by the reliable and trust-worthy evidence deposed by the complainant P.W1, Muhammad Mukhtar P.W2 and Muhammad Nawaz P.W3. Dr. Muhammad Asghar examined Khuda Yar P.W1 on 1.4.1977 and found as many as 13 injuries on his person. The ocular account is corroborated by the medical evidence of the said Doctor P.W4.
Additionally the learned counsel for the petitioner does not challenge the conviction of the petitioners and instead has requested for taking a lenient view in the matter of sentence. The occurrence took place about 12 years ago and as such I do not think it in the interest of justice to send (he petitioners to jail for serving out their remaining sentence. They have already suffered during their protracted trial. I, therefore, while maintaining their conviction sentence the petitioners to the period already undergone by them. With this modification in the sentence, the petition is dismissed.