JUDGMENT M.M. Aggarwal, J. - Petitioners Sabhu, Kanka and Vedu had been convicted for offences under Sections 326/325/324/323/34 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo RI for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine further RI for three months for offence under Section 326/34 Indian Penal Code; one year RI and fine of Rs. 250/- and in default, further RI for one month under Section 325/34 Indian Penal Code; six months RI under Section 324/34 Indian Penal Code and three months RI under Section 323/34 Indian Penal Code by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal. They had filed appeal which was dismissed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal vide judgment dated 19.7.1990. Feeling aggrieved, the present revision has been filed. 2. Prosecution case against petitioners accused was that on 18.8.1983 at about 6.00 PM Dhulli complainant resident of village Lalupura was sitting in his fields on a cot under a Jamun tree and enjoying hukka. His brother Mahinder Singh and his cousin brother Khazana were working in their nearby fields. Then all the three accused petitioners namely Sabhu, Kanka and Vedu armed with Lathi, barcha and gandasi respectively came. They caused injuries on head and left hand of Dhulli with their respective weapons. Khazana intervened. He was also injured by the accused petitioners. The injured were taken to the hospital where they were treated and their injuries were examined. Case was registered, investigated and then accused petitioners faced trial. Case was found to be proved. They were accordingly convicted and sentenced as aforesaid. 3. In this case, prosecution had examined Dhulli complainant as PW-1, Mohinder as PW-2 and Khazana as PW-3 as witnesses of the occurrence. The factum of injuries had been proved by Dr. K.L. Sachdeva PW-4, Dr. A.N. Bajaj PW-7 and Dr. S.C. Singla PW-8. 4. Counsel for the petitioners could not point out any infirmity in the statements of witnesses and the prosecution case but had prayed that lenient view be taken in view of the fact that occurrence had taken place in the year 1983 i.e. 22 years back. 5. Case of the prosecution was duly proved by the factum of eye-witnesses and medical evidence. As such, petition as far as conviction of the petitioners is concerned is dismissed. 6. Occurrence had taken place in the year 1983. 5. Case of the prosecution was duly proved by the factum of eye-witnesses and medical evidence. As such, petition as far as conviction of the petitioners is concerned is dismissed. 6. Occurrence had taken place in the year 1983. Petitioners were convicted by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal on 15.5.1989. Their appeal was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal on 19.7.1990. These petitioners had remained in custody for some time after their appeal was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge. I do not find it a fit case where petitioners accused should be sent to jail at this stage especially when the injured can be compensated with compensation. 7. In this connection, counsel for the petitioner pointed out that Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate had awarded Rs. 1,000/- as compensation to Dhulli and Rs. 250/- as compensation to the other injured Khazana, out of the fine already paid. However, taking into account the injuries which Dhulli had received, I find that he deserves to be compensated more in terms of money. 8. Under these circumstances, it is directed that each of the petitioners shall pay/deposit compensation of Rs. 2,000/- each in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal for payment to Dhulli complainant injured within a period of three months. In that case, the sentence imposed shall stand reduced to already undergone. If any of the accused-petitioners fails to deposit this amount, he shall be liable to undergo the remaining sentence. With this modification, this revision stands dismissed. Petition dismissed.