IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.598 of 2008 SIYA RAM SINGH …..Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. TEJ NARAIN SINGH @ KALI SINGH 3. NAGENDRA SINGH 4. UMESH SINGH 5. SURENDRA SINGH 6. RAMESH SINGH …..Opposite parties ----------- 2. 05.12.2008. This Cr. Revision has been preferred against the judgment dated 29.3.2008 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-I, Sheohar at Sitamarhi in Sessions Trial No. 207 of 2004/ 198 of 2006 thereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted the opposite parties under Sections 148, 326/34, 324 and 447 of the IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for maximum period of three years under section 326 I.P.C. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The only grievance of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that opposite parties were tried under Section 307 I.P.C. but the court below has not convicted the opposite parties under section 307 I.P.C. However, it is conceded that in both sections i.e. 326 and 307 IPC the maximum sentence provided under the Act is life imprisonment. Under the facts and circumstances, it is clear that question of applicability of section 307 of the IPC is purely - 2 - academic as the opposite parties have already been convicted and sentenced under Section 326/34 I.P.C. in which the maximum sentence is life imprisonment. Therefore, no purpose would be served by interfering in the impugned judgment. Accordingly, this Cr. Revision stands rejected at the admission stage itself. kanchan (Ghanshyam Prasad, J.)