K.P.S.Sandhu, J.:-
(1) The respondents were tried, convicted and sentenced as under by the trial magistrate:
(1) lal chand respondent was convicted under section 326 of the indian penal code and pritam ram and tirath ram respondents were convicted under section 326/34 of the indian penal code and each of them was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of rs. 500, in default further rigorous imprisonment for one month. (2) pritam ram was convicted under section 324 of the indian penal code and the others were convicted under section 324/34 of the indian penal code and each of them was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months. (3) tirath ram was convicted under section 323 of the indian penal code and the others were convicted under section 323/34 of the indian penal code and each of them was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three months. (4) lal chand and pritam ram were further convicted under section 324 of the indian penal code and tirath ram was convicted under section 324/34 of the indian penal code and each of them was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months. (5) all the respondents were further convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three months each under section 323/34 of the indian penal code. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. In appeal, the learned additional sessions judge. Bhatinda, set aside the conviction and sentence of lal chand respondent under section 326 of the indian penal code and of pritam ram and tirath ram under section 326/34 of the indian penal code. The learned additional session judge maintained the conviction of the respondents under the other counts and released them on probation. Injured sukhdev singh has come up in revision. Notice of the same was given by pritpal singh. J. , vide his order dated 5th september, 1984.
(2) The respondents are alleged to have caused injuries to sukhdev singh and jasvir singh pw5. The injuries suffered by sukhdev singh petitioner are of a serious nature. I think it was a fit case where the learned additional sessions judge while releasing the respondents on probation should have granted reasonable compensation to sukhdev singh. Consequently i order that each one of the respondents would pay rs. 1. 500 as compensation payable to sukhdev singh. However, the fine imposed on each of the respondents by the learned trial judge which has been converted into costs of litigation by the learned additional sessions judge would also be treated as compensation payable to sukhdev singh petitioner and adjusted towards the payment of rs. 1500 payable as compensation by each respondent. The order of the learned additional sessions judge is amended to that extent. If the compensation is not paid within three months, the respondents would be called upon to serve the sentence imposed by the learned trial court under sections 324, 324 read with section 34,323 and 323 read with section 34 of the indian penal code. This petition thus stands disposed of. Order accordingly.