IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1227 of 2009 1. Kedar Singh son of Late Gena Singh 2. Sudheer Singh 3. Shri Kisun Singh Both sons of Kedar Singh. All rersident of village-Dalan Haripur, P.S. Alauli, District-Khagaria. (Accused-Appellant)………Petitioners Versus State Of Bihar ………..Opposite Party ----------- 2. 08.09.2011 The accused petitioners have preferred this revision application against the judgment and order dated 24.06.2009 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Khagaria in Cr. Appeal No. 40 of 2008 by which the appeal has been dismissed with modification in the sentence. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 12.05.2003 at about 02:00 P.M. Prabhakar Kumar son of the informant Bharat Singh (P.W. 3) was lifting maize which was spread in front of his house and at the same time the co-villagers Kishun Singh called his son saying him thief which was protested by his son on account of which Sri Kishun Singh (petitioner No. 3) assaulted his son with lathi. When he along with his wife went to the house to the accused to make complaint Kedar Singh, Sudheer Singh & Shri Kishun Singh (petitioner No. 1 to 3) assaulted him with fists and slaps and also with lathi and in the midst there of on account of which he sustained injury. On hue and cry his brothers namely, Nageshwar Singh, Shivjee Singh along with others came and rescued them. On the basis of written report of P.W. 3, Bharat Sinigh Alauli P.S. Case No. 59 of 2003 was registered for the offence 2 punishable under Sections 341, 323, 337, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Charge sheet was submitted and cognizance was taken. After the trial all the accused petitioners were held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 323 & 337 of I.P.C. in G.R. No. 664 of 2003 and T.R. No. 69 of 2008 arising out of Alauli P.S. Case No. 59 of 2003 and sentenced to simple imprisonment for six months and find of Rs. 250/- each under Section 327 Indian Penal Code. Thereafter, the petitioners preferred Cr. Appeal No. 40 of 2008. The appeal has been dismissed with modification in the sentence. The petitioners have not been found guilty under Section 337 of Indian Penal Code they have been found guilty under Section 323 of Indian Penal Code and their sentence has been modified to execute bond of Rs. 3000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to be effective for a year with a direction to maintain peace and harmony and in default of which conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate will automatically substituted. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that more than two years have passed. There is no material on the record to show that the petitioners have committed any overt act in the period of bond which has also expired, as such the petitioners would not be compelled to execute the bond. There is no material on record to show that the accused petitioners have any criminal antecedent. The learned counsel for the State could not controvert the contention of the petitioners. After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the impugned order and the material on the record it appears 3 that the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is correct. The occurrence took place on 12.05.2003, more than eight years have passed the petitioner have been suffering from mental agony and the period of bond has also been expired. There is no material on record to show that after passing of the impugned order the petitioners have committed overact. Considering the facts and circumstances stated above, in my opinion, now the petitioners are not required to execute the bond for keeping peace and tranquility. With this modification in the impugned order, this revision application stands dismissed. Saif/- (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)