JUDGMENT T.P.S. Mann, J. (Oral):- The present revision had been filed by complainant-Baldev Singh with a prayer for enhancing the sentences of imprisonment and fine of the accused-respondents. 2. The accused-respondents were tried by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Kharar for offences under Sections 326/324/323/34 IPC. Vide judgment and order dated 31.7.1992, they were convicted for the aforementioned offences and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.800/- each under Section 326/34 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- each under Section 324/34 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for six months each under Section 323/34 IPC. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 3. Aggrieved of their conviction and sentences, the accused-respondents filed an appeal but the same was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge, Ropar. Still not satisfied, they filed Criminal Revision No. 619 of 1993 in this Court for challenging their conviction and sentences whereas the complainant-petitioner filed the present revision for enhancement of sentences of imprisonment. Vide order dated 3.2.1994, it was directed that the hearing of the present revision shall take place alongwith Criminal Revision No. 619 of 1993 filed by the accused-respondents. 4. The revision filed by the accused-respondents against their conviction and sentences has since been decided by this Court on 9.7.2007. The sentence awarded to the accused-respondents under Section 326 IPC has been reduced to one and half years whereas the sentence of fine as well as the sentences awarded against the petitioners for the remaining offences have been upheld. It appears that for some reason, the present revision filed by the complainant could not be taken up for hearing at the time of final hearing of the revision filed by the accused-respondents against their conviction and sentences. 5. As all the relevant facts especially regarding quantum of sentence have already been considered by this Court while disposing of Criminal Revision No. 619 of 1993 and reducing the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon the accused-respondents for the offence under Section 326 IPC from three years to one and a half years, therefore, no case is made out for any interference in the present revision filed by the complainant. Infact the same has practically been rendered infructuous. Disposed of as such. ------------