- (1.) IN these criminal revisions, accused-petitioners (1) Jitendra and (2) Jagdeep @ Deepak have not challenged their conviction on merits by the two courts below but their only prayer is that they should be given the benefit of undergone sentence and be ordered to be released forthwith in the matter because as per them they are in jail since long in the matter under consideration.
(2.) BRIEF facts may be narrated as follows: Out of four accused-persons, accused Deepak s/o Rohitash was absconding and other three accused-persons, namely, (1) Jitendra, (2) Jagdeep @ Deepak s/o Satyawan and (3) Hansa @ Hans Raj had been convicted by Judicial Magistrate, Sadulshahar, District Sriganganagar vide order dated 6.9.2012 under Section 394/34 IPC and then the matter was referred by him to the Chief Judicial Magistrate as per the provisions of Section 325 Cr.PC. for passing appropriate sentence according to the gravity of the offence. Then, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sriganganagar in Criminal Case No. 334/2012 in continuation of Criminal Case No.611/2009 of Judicial Magistrate, Sadulshahar, had passed the sentence on 18.10.2012 against the aforesaid three accused-persons and all the three of them were sentenced for the offence under Section 394/34 IPC to five year's rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/- on each of them.
(3.) THEN the matter went in appeal and accused Jagdeep @ Deepak and Hansa @ Hansraj had filed Criminal Appeal No.244/2012 while Jitendra had filed Criminal Appeal No. 276/2012 and both the appeals were decided by the common judgment by the Addl . Sessions Judge No.2, Sri Ganganagar and that court has upheld the conviction of all the three accused-persons under Section 394/34 IPC but their sentence was reduced from five years to three years' rigorous imprisonment, while the sentence of fine was upheld as such.;