IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.844 of 2010 1. Sairam Das @ Sarban Das 2. Bairam Das Both sons of Late Bharosi Das. 3. Sikandra Das 4. Binod Das @ Hari Das Both sons of Jawahar Das All R/o Mohalla Jagatpur Ward no.6, police Station Banka, Dist.Banka. ---- Petitioners. Versus The State of Bihar --- Opp.Party. For the Petitioners : Mr.Dr. Manoj Kumar For the State : Mr. Dr. Mayanand Jha, APP ----------- 02 02.07.2010 Heard both sides. Rule confined to question of sentence only. Learned A.P.P. waives notice on behalf of the State of Bihar. With the consent of the parties, the present revision application is being disposed of at this stage itself. Petitioners are aggrieved by the appellate order dated 05.04.2010, passed in Criminal Appeal no. 121 of 2001, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioners herein was dismissed and the judgment and order of conviction dated 26.09.2001, recorded by the learned trial Court has been affirmed. For an occurrence allegedly taken place on 22.05.1992, the petitioners herein were charged under Sections 147, 452 and 323 of the Penal Code. On a consideration of the evidence adduced at the trial on behalf of the prosecution, it was found that the charge(s) leveled against the petitioners stand 2 proved beyond shadow of all reasonable doubts. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order, the petitioners herein preferred the aforesaid appeal. Learned lower appellate Court re-scanned the evidence and thereafter found that the evidence brought on record in the light of Exhibits 1 and 2 demonstrate the culpability of the petitioners. In that view of the matter, learned lower appellate Court refused to interfere with the judgment and order of the trial Court. Learned counsel for the petitioners, while assailing the impugned judgments, made only one submission. It is submitted that the occurrence in the present case had taken place sometimes in the year 1992. The trial of the case consumed more than nine years. For all these years the petitioners were made to undergo the ordeal/rigours of trial. It is next contended that fighting a criminal litigation and thereby reeling under the threat of being punished for such a long time is in itself a shade of punishment. The Courts below ought to have considered this aspect of the matter while imposing sentence. This Court finds from the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court that no criminal antecedent of the petitioners herein was found and recorded. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the two judgments on record, this Court is of the view that while maintaining the conviction recorded under diverse Sections of the Penal Code the ends of justice shall be sub served if a lesser punishment is awarded to the petitioners. Consequently, 3 the sentence of R.I. for 01 year awarded under Section 452 of the Penal Code is reduced to a period of 06 months R.I. Let it be recorded that the Court has interfered with only in respect of sentence awarded under Section 452 of the Penal Code. With this modification in sentence only, the application is dismissed. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)