IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1117 of 2010 SHEORAM PASWAN SON OF SITA RAM PASWAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KATHA P.S. BAROON DISTRICT AURANGABAD. …Petitioner Versus STATE OF BIHAR …Opposite party ----------- 03. 16.08.2010 Rule confined to the question of sentence only. Learned APP waives service of notice on behalf of the State With the consent of the parties, the application is now being disposed of. For an occurrence that had taken place on 15.11.1998, the petitioner was charge under sections 323 and 325 IPC. Allegation against the petitioner is that when the informant saw 2-3 buffallows grazing his crops, he tried to drive them away. This was protested by the accuseds whereafter it is alleged that he was assaulted by means of Lathi on different parts of his body (not on the vital part). The prosecution in order to prove charge(s) examined five witnesses. P.W.1 is the informant who is said to have received injury. P.W.5 is the doctor who examined him of his injury. Considering the materials on record including the evidence of the informant and the doctor (P.W.5), learned trial court has found that the charge under section 323 IPC has been proved beyond shadow of reasonable doubts. He was accordingly convicted. So far as section 325 IPC is concerned, the petitioner was acquitted of the 2 charge. Learned trial court on a consideration of the fact that he was aged about 38 years and was not previously convicted and the fact that the occurrence had taken place over trivial issue, sentenced him to undergo R.I. for six months. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order of conviction, the petitioner preferred criminal appeal being Cr.Appeal No.04/2003/53/2009 in the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge IV, Aurangabad. The learned lower appellate court re-appraised the evidence and came to the conclusion that findings of guilt recorded by learned trial court do not warrant any interference. Appeal was, thus, dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly the occurrence had taken place over a trivial issue. It is stated that both parties are of the same village and are residing adjacent to each other. It is next submitted that for about five years the petitioner had to undergo the ordeal of trial which in itself is a punishment as fighting litigation for a long time definitely tells upon the mental and economical condition of the litigant. It is thus contended that the petitioner deserves lessor punishment. Learned APP, on the other hand, supported the impugned judgment. It is stated that there are concurrent findings of guilt recorded by learned two courts below which have not been shown to be perverse and/or perfunctory and, as such, they do not merit any interference. Having considered the submissions and after going 3 through materials on record, this Court is satisfied that submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner that punishment, in the facts and circumstances of the case, seems to be excessive has some force. Consequently, while maintaining the conviction under section 323 IPC, the sentence so imposed is reduced to R.I. for four months. With this modification in sentence, the application is dismissed. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )