IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.255 of 2010 1. GURU SHARAN MAHTO 2. Baso Mahto 3. Rajaram Mahto Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ------ 3/ 08.03.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that there is land dispute in between the parties and the petitioners have been sentenced for a period of three months for the offence under Sections 323 and 342 of the I.P.C. each and remained in custody for a period of two months six days. According to him, it was a case in which they (petitioners) were entitled for relief under the Probation of Offenders Act and they remained in custody for a period of more than two month. So, in my view also such period may be observed sufficient towards sentence. Accordingly, the revision application is party allowed and the sentence is modified and minimized to the period undergone by the petitioners. Petitioners are directed to be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. Rest of the Judgment and order dated 11.11.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rosera in Cr. Appeal No. 29 of 1998 and the order passed by the J.M. Ist Class, Rosera in T.R. No. 2 of 1998/G.R. No. 387 of 1991 arising out of Hasanpur P.S. Case No. 119 of 1991 are hereby affirmed. shail (Mandhata Singh, J.)