IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.407 of 2011 1. RAJ MANGAL PASWAN, S/O- NAGESHWAR PASWAN. 2. RAM BRIKSH PASWAN, S/O- LATE SUKESHWAR PASWAN. 3. RAMNATH PASWAN, S/O- KULDIP PASWAN. 4. CHANDER PASWAN, S/O- HARDEO PASWAN 5. RAJ KUMAR PASWAN, S/O- RAMJI PASWAN 6. RAM JULUM PASWAN, S/O- LATE SUKESHWAR PASWAN ALL R/O- VILLAGE BHORAHA, TOLA- GAUS NAGAR, P.S.- BELSAND, DISTRICT- SITAMARHI. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR For the petitioner : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate. For the State : Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, APP ----------- 3 19.04.2011 Rule confined to question of sentence only. Learned APP waives notice on behalf of the State. Heard. With the consent of parties, the application is being finally disposed of at this stage itself. Six petitioners have joined hands in assailing the judgment and order dated 30.8.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Fast Track Court No. VI, Sitamarhi in Cr. Appeal No. 23 of 2008/14 of 2008 whereby the appeal stood dismissed with modification in sentence. Learned Trial Court on conclusion of trial vide Tr. No. 758 of 2008 found and held them guilty under diverse sections of the Penal Code. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 were held guilty under Sections 148 and 452 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 02 years with fine having default clause under each count/head. Petitioner Nos. 3 to 6 were held guilty under Sections 147, 323 and 452 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 01 years with fine having default 2 clause each under Sections 147 and 323 of Indian Penal Code. They were sentenced to undergo R.I. for 02 years with fine under Section 452 of Indian Penal Code. With respect to an occurrence that had taken place on 28.4.1991, the petitioners were put on trial for charges punishable under diverse sections of the Penal Code. Five witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution besides exhibiting documents. On a consideration of the materials on record, learned Trial Court found and held them guilty and sentenced in the manner indicated hereinabove. Aggrieved over the said judgment and order of conviction, they preferred appeal. Learned Appellate Court, on a reappraisal of the evidence on record found that the findings of guilt recorded by the learned Trial Court did not warrant interference on merit. However, while maintaining the conviction, sentence awarded thereunder was reduced. The sentence awarded to petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code by the learned Trial Court was reduced to R.I. for 01 years with reduced amount of fine. So far as petitioner nos. 3 to 6 are concerned, the sentenced awarded under Sections 147 and 323 were reduced to R.I. for 01 years and R.I. for 06 months with fine having default clause respectively. The sentence awarded to all the petitioners under Section 452 of Indian Penal Code was, however, maintained. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both 3 the parties are co-villagers. The occurrence as per the prosecution case had taken place on 28.4.1991. The trial of the petitioners consumed close to 15 years. For all these years, they had to face rigours/ordeals of trial which is a shade of punishment and the Court should keep the same in focus while inflicting sentence for the proven charge(s). Referring to the Trial Court judgment, it is submitted that no past conviction was found against the petitioners. It is also contended that at the time of recording conviction, the petitioners were found aged about 40 years to 60 years. It is thus contended that the petitioners deserve lesser quantum of sentence. Learned A.P.P., on the other hand, submits that there is/are concurrent findings of guilt recorded by the two Courts below which have not been demonstrated to be perverse, as such they do not require interference on merit. I have considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties and perused the materials on record including the two judgments. It appears that the occurrence had taken place on 28.4.1991 on the issue of passage. The petitioners and the prosecution seem to be agnates and/or co-villagers residing side by side. The trial consumed more than 15 years. Fighting criminal litigation for such a long period and thereby to undergo ordeal/rigours of trial is a shade of punishment. For all these years, the petitioners had to reel under the threat of being punished. Obviously, they had to face several 4 excruciating/exasperating circumstances having telling effects on their mental and economic conditions. Learned counsel for the petitioners is right in his submission that no previous conviction was found and recorded against them and that they were found aged between 40 to 60 years at the time of recording conviction. This Court is, thus, satisfied that a lesser quantum of sentence, in the facts and circumstances of the case, would sub-serve the cause of justice. Accordingly, while upholding the conviction recorded by the learned Trial Court and duly affirmed by learned Lower Appellate Court, the sentence awarded to them under Section 452 of Indian Penal Code is reduced to R.I. for 01 years. All the petitioners are imposed fine of Rs. 1,000/- (one thousand) each under the said count/head failing which they will have to undergo further period of R.I. for 02 months. Other part(s)/condition(s) of the sentence shall remain intact/unaltered. With this modification in sentence, the application is dismissed. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J)