IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1277 of 2010 1. HIRAMAN PASWAN SON OF LATE PURAN PAWAN. 2. AJABLAL PASWAN S/O LATE PURAN PASWAN 3. KALPU PASWAN SON OF LATE PURAN PASWAN 4. RAM BILASH PASWAN SON OF KALPU PASWAN 5. RITO PASWAN SON OF AJABLAL PASWAN 6. MUNILAL PASWAN SON OF AJABLAL PASWAN --- PETITIONERS. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ---- OPP. PARTY. For the Petitioners : Mr. Sujit Kr. Singh, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP ----------- 02 27.08.2010 Rule confined to question of sentence only. Learned APP waives notice on behalf of the State. With the consent of the parties the present revision application is being disposed of at this stage itself. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present case arises out of a complaint. Genesis is that petitioner no.1 wanted to purchase the disputed land which was however purchased by the complainant. On the date of occurrence i.e. 01.09.1996 petitioners came armed with danda at the disputed land and all of them slapped and fisted the complainant. It is further allegation that they uprooted ten bamboos. At the trial as many as 03 prosecution witnesses were examined. Learned trial Court (Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Samastipur) in Tr. No. 206 of 2007, on a consideration of the evidence on record, found that the charges punishable under Sections 147, 323 and 379 of the Penal Code stand proved accordingly they were sentenced to undergo R.I. for one years under each head and a consolidated fine of Rs. one thousand was also imposed having default clause(s). Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order of conviction petitioners herein preferred Cr. Appeal no. 25 of 2007 which was considered and dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no. V, Samastipur. While assailing the judgment and order of conviction of two Courts below learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on a petty issue the present occurrence is said to have taken place. It is next contended that although they were armed with danda but the allegation is that the complainant was only fisted and slapped. Both parties are co-villagers. Genesis of the case is the purchase of a disputed piece of land. The occurrence had taken place in the year 1996 wherein the conviction has been recorded in the year 2007. They were thus made to undergo the agony of trial for about 11 years. On these submissions it is submitted that petitioners deserve lesser punishment even if the prosecution is found to have proved the charges. Learned APP, on the other hand, supported the two impugned judgment and order of conviction. It is contended that there is concurrent finding of guilty recorded by the two courts below which have not been shown to be perverse and as such they need not be interfered. I have heard both the sides. This Court finds that the occurrence had taken place on 01.09.1996 whereas the trial Court recorded the judgment and order of conviction on 19.02.2007. Definitely the petitioners had to undergo the rigors of trial for 11 years. It is admitted position that they are co- villagers and there appears to be dispute relating to a piece of land measuring 16 dhurs. Petitioner no.1 wanted to purchase the said land which was however purchased by complainant that aggravated the situation. It is further seen that they were armed with danda but the complainant was only assaulted by fists and slaps. This Court is thus satisfied that a lesser punishment, in the facts and circumstances of the case shall meet the ends of justice. Consequently the sentence of R.I. for 01 years recorded under Sections 323, 147 and 379 of the Penal Code under each head is reduced to a period of R.I. 02 months under each head. The consolidated fine of Rs. one thousand is also reduced to Rs. 500/-(Five hundred), in default whereof, all the petitioners will further undergo S.I. for 15 days. With this modification in sentence(s), the application is dismissed. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)