Judgment Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. 1. Balwant Singh, Gurnam Singh and Vir Singh, all three brothers, were prosecuted in case FIR No. 169 of 1990 registered at Police Station Patti under Sections 326, 324, 323 & 34 IPC. 2. In the present case, occurrence is stated to have taken place on 3.9.1990 when complainant Jagtar Singh was watering his fields along with his son Vir Singh. Over the turn of water, the present dispute had taken place. Jagtar Singh had suffered five injuries. Injury No. 1 was grievous. Grievous injury was on the left elbow joint. Vir Singh had also suffered five injuries. Injury No. 3 was declared grievous. This injury was on the left forearm. Balwant Singh accused had also suffered an injury. The Courts below relied upon the testimony of PW.1 Jagtar Singh and PW.2 Vir Singh and held that no right of self-defence had accrued to the accused. 3. Petitioners were awarded two years rigorous imprisonment by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Patti. Aggrieved against the same, they filed an appeal. Their appeal was dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, on 5.7.1994, who maintained their conviction but reduced the sentence to one year. 4. Mr. Pheruman appearing for the petitioners has very fairly stated that in the revision petition, he will not be able to dislodge the testimony of two witnesses, which had been believed by the Courts below. Findings of fact recorded by two Courts below cannot be disturbed by the revisional Court. Re- appreciation or re-evaluation of the evidence is not permissible. No illegality or irregularity in the investigation or conduct of the trial has been pointed out. 5. It is admitted that both complainant and the accused have their fields adjoining to each other. In the last 18 years, there has been peace between the parties. Mr. Pheruman has stated that the parties are living in amity and harmony and there is complete peace. 6. I am in agreement with the contention of Mr. Pheruman that if the petitioners are sent behind the bars, this may act as trigger or disturb the peace maintained between the parties. 7. Mr. Pheruman has stated that the parties are living in amity and harmony and there is complete peace. 6. I am in agreement with the contention of Mr. Pheruman that if the petitioners are sent behind the bars, this may act as trigger or disturb the peace maintained between the parties. 7. Taking into account that in the last 18 years, the petitioners have committed no offence and they have suffered protracted trial and they have been sentenced for one year, I reduce the sentence of petitioners to already undergone and enhance the sentence of fine to Rs.20,000/- qua each accused. Fine be deposited in the Court on or before 7.5.2008. Rs.60,000/- of fine be disbursed by the trial Court to the two injured. Non-payment of fine will render this revision petition as dismissed. 8. With these observations, the present revision petition is disposed off.