IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.458 of 2010 1. DASRATH YADAV 2. Lakshman Yadav 3. Kailash Yadav 4. Bhola Yadav 5. Sheshnath Yadav 6. Amrit Yadav 7. Bhagirath Yadav Versus 1. The STATE OF BIHAR 2. Ram Narain Yadav ----------- 3/ 06.04.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that land dispute was there in between the parties. There was some quarrel for the same. In that continuation, if some assault was there can easily be believed but a super allegation was leveled about taking away one tin of vegetable oil to make the offence serious. That is believed by both the Courts making concurrent finding. So, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that he prefers to press the sentence only. All the accused persons have been sentenced for a period of one month for the offence under Sections 147, 323 and 448 of the I.P.C., while petitioner no.1 has further been sentenced for a period of six months for the offence under Section 380 of the I.P.C. and all surrendered and remanded to custody on 17.03.2010, which can be observed sufficient towards sentence. I agree with the submission of the learned counsel for 2 the petitioners. Accordingly, the revision petition is partly allowed and the sentence is minimized to the period undergone by the petitioners. Petitioners are directed to be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. Rest Judgment and order dated 12.08.2009 passed in Cr. Appeal No. 8 of 1995 by the Addl. Sessions Judge (F.T.C.) IInd, Bhagalpur and the order dated 13.03.1995 passed by the J.M., Ist Class, Bhagalpur are hereby affirmed. Let the order be communicated through F.A.X. at the cost of the petitioners in the Court of Sri A.K. Sinha, J.M., Ist Class, Bhasgalpur in connection with Complaint Case NO. 358(c) of 1989. Shail ( Mandhata Singh, J.)