IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.232 of 2010 1. PHULO YADAV 2. Sikandra Yadav 3. Pongal Yadav 4. Munna Yadav 5. Shutha Yadav 6. Deonarayan Yadav 7. Sivan Yadav 8. Gango Yadav 9. Hari Charan Yadav 10. Ganeshi Yadav 11. Umesh Yadav 12. Ram Sunder Yadav Versus The STATE OF BIHAR ------ 3/ 09.03.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. By referring pendency of the title suit, parties being gotia and a counter case also against informant party filed on behalf of the defence side, it is submitted that the petitioners should have been given benefit under the Probation of Offenders Act either releasing after admonition or execution of bond which has not been considered at all either by the Trial Court or by the Appellate Court but that is of no avail for the petitioners, as they remained in custody for a period of near about one month. So, even after convincing with the submission, in my view, if the sentence is minimized to the period undergone that will meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, the revision application is partly allowed on the point of sentence only and the above named petitioners are directed to be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. Rest of the Judgment and order dated 30.11.2009 passed in Cr. Appeal No. 8 of 2000 by the Sessions Judge, Khagaria 2 and the order dated 25.01.2000 passed in G.R. Case NO. 850 of 1993 are hereby affirmed. Let the order be communicated through F.A.X. at the cost of the petitioners in connection with G.R. Case No. 850 of 1993 arising out of Alauli P.S. Case No. 81 of 1993, Tr. No. 06 of 1998 in the Court of Sessions Judge, Khagaria. shail (Mandhata Singh, J.)