1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No.2291 of 2008 In Criminal Revision Application No. of 2008 (Vasanta s/o Kashinath Borde and others v. The State of Maharashtra) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions : Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Shri Abhay Sambre, Advocate for Applicants. Shri D.B. Patel, APP for Non-Applicant. CORAM : R.C. Chavan, J. DATE : 5th January, 2009 Criminal Application No.2291 of 2008 : Heard. Notice to the non-applicant. The learned APP waives service for the non- applicant. Delay is condoned. Criminal Revision Application No. of 2008 : This revision is directed against the appellate order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Buldana, whereby he partly allowed the applicants' appeal against their conviction recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Deulgaonraja. The learned Additional Sessions Judge altered the conviction from offence punishable under Section 326 to one under Section 325 of the Penal Code and sentenced 2 the applicants to imprisonment till rising of the Court and pay a fine of Rs.3.000/- each. He also directed that out of the amount of fine deposited, a sum of Rs.2,250/- each shall be paid to victims Chandrabhan and Sonaji. This revision takes exception to the said order. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicants as well as the learned APP for the non-applicant and have gone through the judgments of both the Courts. There is no question of the applicants having been wrongly convicted, since there is an eye-witness account of injured persons themselves indicating complicity of the applicants. The sentence imposed does not call for interference. The revision application is, therefore, dismissed. JUDGE pdl