Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No. 905 of 2002 =========================================================== 1. Chaturbhuj Singh @ Manoj Singh 2. Mukesh Singh. Both Sons of Sri Bhagirath Singh. 3. Bhagirath Singh. 4. Sita Ram Singh. Both sons of Sri Ram Bahadur Singh, All resident of Village- Mohanpur, Police Station- Dharhara, District- Munger. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party =========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Opposite Party : Mr. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 24-02-2012 Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Mrs. Indu Bala Pandey, learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. This revision application is directed against the Judgment and order dated 12.08.2002 by which the petitioner no. 1 was convicted under [STATUTE] . By order dated 14.08.2002 petitioner no. 1 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and fine of Rs. 5,00/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. Petitioners no. 2 to 4 were sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one month and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,00/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment of 15 days. The petitioners no. 2 to 4 instead of Patna High Court CR. REV. No.905 of 2002 dt.24-02-2012 2 / 3 2 being sent to jail were released on probation of good conduct on entering into a bond of Rs. 1,000/- and two sureties of the like amount each for one year under Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 3. Earlier by order dated 08.10.2002 this application was admitted for hearing on the question of sentence only with regard to petitioner no. 1. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no. 1 has been falsely implicated as there is land dispute between the parties who are related to each other and also that there is a title suit pending between the parties. It is submitted that the Investigating Officer also did not find either blood or the weapon which is alleged to have been used in the incident. 5. It is submitted that on these two vital findings the petitioners ought not to have been convicted. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have clean antecedent and after the present case they have not been involved in any other criminal case. 6. After going through the judgment impugned, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the finding of guilt and conviction recorded against the petitioners. However, the sentence against petitioner no. 1 stands modified to the extent that he shall not be required to undergo imprisonment any further. He stands discharged from their liabilities of his bail Patna High Court CR. REV. No.905 of 2002 dt.24-02-2012 3 / 3 3 bond as well as the sureties. However, the fine imposed against the petitioners, if already not paid, must be paid within three months from today. 7. This application accordingly, stands disposed off in the aforementioned terms. Patna High Court Dated 24th Feb, 2012 Anand Kr./N.A.F.R. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 324

Statute Text:
Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means. Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 334, voluntarily causes hurt by means of any instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting, or any instrument which, used as a weapon of offence, is likely to cause death, or by means of fire or any heated substance, or by means of any poison or any corrosive substance, or by means of any explosive substance or by means of any substance which it is deleterious to the human body to inhale, to swallow, or to receive into the blood, or by means of any animal, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.