1. The petitioners were convicted by Magistrate First Class, Toba Tek Singh, to one year R.I. Each under section 324/34, P.P.C. And six months' R.I. Each under section 323/34, P.P.C. It was, however, directed that the sentences under section 324/323/34 shall 'run concurrently. They were further directed to pay compensation of Rs.500 each or in default R.I. For six months. It was further directed to pay compensation of Rs.100 each to Ismatullah injured P.W or in default R.I. For one month each. They appealed. Additional Sessions Judge, Toba Tak Singh, vide his judgment dated 4-5-1983, dismissed the appeal with the modification that in default of payment RS.5(X) they shall undergo R.I. For three months each.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners at the very outset submitted that the occurrence took place in tile year 1981 and ever since then they have been facing the hardship of trial. Submitted that they have undergone about three months' imprisonment, which would be sufficient. Learned counsel for the State has no objection.
3. Keeping in view that eleven years have gone by yet the proceedings, against the petitioners have not been concluded, I feel this fact alone requires some leniency. Therefore, while dismissing the revision, I reduce the sentence to tile period already undergone by them. The revision is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.