1. Mr. A.G. Pervez, Advocate has filed an application on behalf of Rehmat Ali son of Ghulam Muhammad, complainant in the case, with a request that the parties may be allowed to compromise.
2. The background leading to the filing of this revision are that petitioners were tried by Magistrate Section 30, Daska; for an offence under section 342/452/307/148, P.P.C. The trial Court vide its judgment, dated 28-11-1981, convicted and sentenced Ejaz Ahmed petitioner to six months' R.I.
3. Under section 148, P.P.C. And six months' R.I. Under section 452; P.P.C. He was also awarded two years' R.I. Under section 307/149, P.P.C. As far as the case of the petitioner. Ghulam Rasool, Bashir Ahmed, Muhammad Malik and Muhammad Aslam is concerned, each of them was sentenced to 3 months' R.I. Under section 148, P.P.C. They were further convicted and sentenced to 3 months' R.I.
4. Under section 452, P.P.C. Each and one year's R.I. Under section 307, P.P.C. Each, respectively. They appealed which was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sialkot, on 16-5-1983.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners at the very outset submitted he neither challenges the judgment impugned nor presses for the acquittal of the petitioners. His sole prayer is that the sentence of imprisonment already undergone by the petitioners would adequately meet the ends of justice. Learned Assistant Advocate-General has no objection.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the evidence, I feel the petitioners have rightly been convicted and sentenced. There is ample evidence to connect the petitioners with the commission of offence. No exception to the judgment impugned can be taken.
6. However, keeping in view that the occurrence had taken place as far back as March, 1979 and ever since then they are facing hardships of criminal prosecution, while dismissing the revision, the sentence of imprisonment of each of the petitioners is reduced to the period I already undergone by him. Revision is disposed of in these terms.