CRIMINAL REVISION No.90 OF 2002 ---- Against the judgment dated 20.12.2001 passed by Sri Shyam Nandan Prasad Verma,Adhoc District & Sessions Judge,F.T.Court No.1,Saran,Chapra in Sessions Trial No. 348 of 1987/178 of 2001. ----- 1. Ramanand Rai 2. Baij Nath Rai 3. Parmatma Rai 4. Dharmatma Rai 5. Kamla Rai …… Petitioners Versus The State of Bihar …… Opp. Party ---- For the petitioners : Mr. Arvind Kumar Srivastava For the State : Mr. G.P.Jaiswal, Addl.P.P. --- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHYAM KISHORE SHARMA ---- S.K.Sharma,J. The above petitioners have filed this revision application against the judgment dated 20.12.2001 passed by Adhoc District & Sessions Judge, Saran, Chapra in Sessions Trial No. 348 of 1987/178 of 2001 by which petitioner no.1 Ramanand Rai has been convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code and rest four petitioners i.e. petitioner nos. 2 to 4 namely, Baij Nath Rai, Parmatma Rai, Dharmatma Rai and Kamla Rai have been convicted under Sections 323 and 147 of the Indian Penal Code and they have been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each under each count. The sentences of these four petitioners were ordered to run concurrently. This revision application has been admitted on 7.2.2002 for hearing only on the question of sentence. Heard learned counsel for the parties. From perusal of the judgment it appears that the court below after considering the evidences of P.Ws.1,2 and 3, who are examined as eye witnesses, came to the conclusion that the petitioners have committed the offence as alleged 2 and convicted and sentenced them, as stated above. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the occurrence is of the year 1985 i.e. about 23 years ago and no previous conviction has been brought on the record. So lenient view in the matter of sentence may be taken and if the sentences are reduced to the period already undergone by them, the same will be sufficient for the ends of justice. After analysing the entire materials on record and considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am in full agreement with the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the sentences of the petitioners are required to be modified. Accordingly, the sentences of the petitioners are reduced to the period already undergone by them during trial and revision which will be sufficient for the ends of justice. In the result, this revision application is dismissed with modification in sentence. ( Shyam Kishore Sharma, J. ) Patna High Court, Patna The 15th April,2008 Tahir/-NAFR.