CRIMINAL APPEAL No.25 OF 1998 Against the judgment and order, dated 17.12.1998 and 18.12.1998 passed in Sessions Trial No. 15/1996 / 82/1988 by Shri Krishna Kant Sahay, 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Nawadah. … 1. Ram Nandan Singh, 2. Krishnandan Singh, 3. Vijay Singh, all sons of Late Jamuna Singh, 4. Bhola Singh, son of Late Mathura Singh, all residents of village Chita Bigha, P.O. Sisma, P.S. Hisua, District Nawadah .. Appellants. Vs. The State of Bihar. For the appellants : Mr. Arun Kumar Tripathi, Amicus Curia. For the S t a t e : Mr. S. Azeem, A. P. P. … P R E S E N T Hon’ble Justice Smt. Sheema Ali Khan. S.A.Khan,J. When no one appeared on behalf of the appellants in this case, Mr. Arun Kumar Tripathi, Advocate was asked to assist this court as Amicus Curia. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order, dated 17.12.1998 and 18.12.1998 passed by 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Nawadah against the four appellants by which they have been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years for the offences under sections 307/34 of the Penal Code. 3. The allegations, in short, are that Ram Nandan Singh gave a lathi blow on the head of Bachchu Singh whereas Krishnandan Singh gave a chhura blow to Sitaram Singh causing injury in the thumb of his left hand and other appellants are said to have assaulted 2 by lathi. 4. Five witnesses have been examined in this case and they have supported the case of the prosecution inasmuch as two of the injured witnesses have stated that they were assaulted by the appellants aforesaid. 5. The injury report has been discussed by the trial court at paragraph 9 of the judgment and the doctor has been examined as PW 5. The injury report indicates that all the injuries were simple in nature including injury no.1 which was on the head by a lathi with a Kanti was attached. Bachchu Singh was sent for X-ray to determine whether injury no. 1 was grievous in nature, however, it appears that no X-ray report was received indicating that injury no.1 was grievous. 6. The genesis of the occurrence is disputed by the appellants and they submitted that the occurrence took place because the informant and his brother were disposing of garbage in their field whereas the prosecution case is that was a demand of donation (Chanda) for pursuing the murder case pending against the appellants. This part of the occurrence is somewhat watered down by the evidence in court. However, the informant and the injured witnesses have tried strenuously to show that the occurrence took place because of the alleged illegal demand. 7. In the facts of this case and on perusal of the evidence I find that the appellants had assaulted the informant and his brother Sitaram, PW 3 and both of them received simple injuries. 8. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the 3 appellants have remained in custody for more than a month, i.e. 32-34 days. It is submitted that the occurrence took place in the year, 1987. In the circumstances it would serve no purpose if the appellants are sent back into custody. 9. Considering the fact that the injuries are simple in nature and that the appellants have remained in custody for about 32- 34 days, this court convicts the appellants but alter the sentence by directing that each of them should pay a fine of Rs.1000/- to the informant within a period of two months on receipt of notice from the trial court. It is made clear that if the appellants fail to pay the fine within two months as aforesaid, they shall be liable to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. 10. In the result, this appeal is dismissed with the aforesaid modification in the sentence. Patna High Court, March 26, 2009, N.A.F.R. / Haque. (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)