IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CR. REV. No.656 of 2010
1. Bir Chandra Sah, Son of Shiv Sharan Sah
2. Ranjeet @ Jwala Prasad Son of Bir Chandra Sah, both resident of village
Saidpur Ganesh, P.S. Biddupur, Dist. Vaishali.
--- Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
-- Opp. Party.
For the Petitioners : Mr. Shyam Sundar Sinha 'Shyam', Advocate.
For the State : Mr. M.Jha, APP.
-----------
03 22.06.2010 Heard both sides.
Rule limited to question of sentence.
Learned A.P.P. waives notice for the State of Bihar.
Lower court records have already been received. With
the consent of the party, this application is being disposed of at
this stage itself.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the
evidence available on record would indicate that both the parties
are agnates. Referring to the prosecution case, it is contended that
on a trivial issue the occurrence is said to have taken place. It is
further submitted that petitioner no.1, namely Bir Chandra Sah is
the father of petitioner no.2, namely Ranjeet @ Jwala Prasad.
Referring to the evidence on record, learned counsel for the
petitioners submits that petitioner no.1 is related to the informant
as ‘Bhaisur’ (brother -in-law). With reference to the evidence of
the defence witness, it is pointed out that prior to the present
occurrence, there was some land dispute between the parties. Both
the petitioners have been convicted under Sections 323, 341 and
379 of the Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo S.I. for six
2
months, one month and 18 months respectively. They have also
been imposed a fine of Rs. five hundred with default clause. The
appeal preferred by them stood rejected as the appellate Court did
not find any illegality, irregularity and/ or impropriety in the
judgment and order of conviction and the sentence(s) recorded by
the learned trial Court. It appears from the two judgments that
petitioner no.1 is fairly aged person whereas petitioner no.2 is a
boy aged about 24-25 years.
Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State has
not been able to demonstrate from the record that they were earlier
convicted for any offence. Learned trial Court has also not
recorded the said finding.
Having considered the aforesaid aspects of the matter,
I am of the view that the following sentences shall sub serve the
ends of justice:-
The sentence recorded under Section 379 of the Penal
Code is reduced to a period of nine months. The sentences
recorded under Sections 323 and 341 of the Penal Code are
untouched. The imposition of fine of Rs. five hundred with default
clause is also not interfered with.
With the aforesaid modification in the sentences the
application is dismissed.
Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)