IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.115 of 2010 1. SITA RAM YADAV 2. Mita Ram Yadav Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3/ 15.02.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. This revision application is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 09.09.2008 passed in Cr. Appeal No. 136 of 1995/85 of 2007 by the Addl. Sessions Judge, F.T.C. No.1, Aurangabad, who dismissed the appeal and confirmed the sentences passed under Section 323 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for six months in G.R. No. 135/86, T.R. No. 90 of 1995 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist class, Aurangabad. Pressing the sentence submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that there is a land dispute between the parties. Specifically, it is said that nature of offence followed by the land dispute and custody if are considered, period undergone by the petitioners is sufficient towards punishment though they should be released on probation only. Petitioners surrendered on 12.01.2010 since then they are in custody. In my view, also discussed suggested 2 circumstances entitle the petitioners for modification on the point of sentence. Accordingly, the revision application is partly allowed on the point of sentence affirming the conviction passed by both the Courts. The period of sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by the petitioners and the above named petitioners are directed to be released forthwith, if not wanted in other case. Let the order be communicated through F.A.X. at the cost of the petitioners in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Ist class, Aurangabad in connection with G.R. No. 135 of 1986 and T.R. No. 90 of 1995. Shail ( Mandhata Singh, J.)