Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.124 of 1998 **** Against the judgment, dated 24.03.1998, passed by Sri Subodh Paswan, Additional Sessions Judge, IV, Vaishali at Hajipur, in S. Tr. No. 393 of 1990 **** 1. Suresh Sahni, son of Jugeshwar Sahni 2. Singeshwar Sahni, son of Kamal Sahni 3. Devendra Sahni, son of Kamal Sahni 4. Marihar Sahni, son of Baban Sahni All are residents of village Mishraulia, P.S. Jandaha, district Vaishali ..Appellants Versus The State off Bihar .. Respondent **** For the Appellants .. Mr. Awadhesh Kr. Singh, Adv. For the Respondent .. Mr. Sujit Kr. Singh, APP **** P R E S E N T THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL PRASAD Gopal Prasad, J. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the State. 2. Appellants 1, 2 and 3 have been convicted under Section 323 of the Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four months and appellant 4 has been convicted under Section 323 of the Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. 3. There is prior enmity for passage of both the appellants and the prosecution party from their house through gairmazrua land. The occurrence took place for protest for tying the bullock on one side of the passage and storage of article to the other side of the passage causing inconvenience and this led to the abuse and assault and it is alleged that the accused persons came with bhala, farsa and assaulted the prosecution party. 2 4. The learned counsel for the appellants contended that there is allegation of assault by bhala, farsa and lathi, however, the doctor has found only one lacerated wound caused by hard and blunt substance, which are simple in nature and the order of conviction though recorded under Section 323 of the Penal Code, benefit under Section 360 of Probation of Offenders Act has not been extended and the appellants have harassed due to protracted litigation since 1990. 5. Hence, taking into consideration the facts and circumstance the occurrence is of the year 1990 and, hence, under the facts and circumstances, I find that the learned trial Court did not consider why the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act be not given to the appellants though the trial Court acquitted the appellants of charged under Section 307/34 of the Penal Code and convicted as mentioned. 6. Hence, having regard to the facts and circumstances, I find and hold that the appellants are entitled for the benefit under Probation of Offenders Act and, hence, the appellants are order to be released on due admonition. 7. With these observations and directions, this appeal is dismissed. ( Gopal Prasad, J. ) The Patna High Court, The 23rd day of September, 2011, N.A.F.R., S.A.