Giridhar Malviya, J. - (1.) On a complaint being filed against the present applicants-Radhey Shyam and Prem Chand as also against Smt. Gaytri Devi, Mukesh and Km. Vinay, the accused named in the complaint, were summoned under Sections 323, 147, 504, 506, 342, and 307 IPC. The allegation in the complaint was that daughter of the complainant Srimati had been married to Radhey Shyam applicant. Radhey Shyam, his brother Prem Chand, Smt Gaytri Devi wife of Prem Chand, Mukesh son of Prem Chand and Km. Vinay daughter of Prem Chand used to torture her. on 17. 1. 1-983 at about 1.30 p. m. the accused persons gave a beating to Srimati with fists and kicks and dandas and locked her in a room. It was only on 19.1.1983 that a villager of village Bhursa informed the complainant about the alleged torture and beating. Thereafter the complainant along with Munna Lal, Sarvan lal, Chokhpal and others went to village Bhursa. Thereafter, Srimati was freed. After coming to know the entire incident, the complainant took Srimati to Hathras where a written report was lodged at police station Hathras Gate. Srimati was medically examined in the Government Hospital. The Ist additional Munsif-Magistrate, Hathras relying upon the testimony of the witnesses, found all the accused guilty with the result that he convicted Radhey Shyam, Prem Chand, Smt. Gaytry Devi, Mukesh and Km. Vinay under Sections 147, 323 and 342 I. P. C. and awarded each of them six month's R. I. under Section 147 1. P. C. four months R. I. under Section 323 1. P. C. and four months Rule 1, under section 342 I. P. C. All the accused preferred an appeal. The learned 11nd Additional Sessions Judge, Aligarh while maintaining the conviction of other persons, the conviction of Mukesh to be bad in the eyes of law with the result that the appeal of Mukesh was allowed in toto. The learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge Aligarh by the said Judgment dated 29. 6. 1987 also found that instead of sending Km. Vinay and Smt. Gaytri Devi to Jail under Sections 323 and 342 I. P. C., it would have been desirable to release them on probation for a period of four months' each on furnishing bonds by them to maintain peace and good behaviour. However, conviction of all the accused under Section 147 I. P.C. was set aside by the appellate court. Against the judgment of the appellate court, Radhey Shyam and Prem Chand preferred this revision which was admitted on the question of sentence only. Thereafter, the applicants were released on bail. I have heard Sri M. Islam, learned counsel for the applicants and also Sri R. P. Tripathi, learned Counsel for the State. The incident in question had taken place in the year 1983. It appears to me that no useful purpose would, now, be achieved by sending these persons to jail again. The ends of justice would be met if the sentence of these two applicants as modified to the period of imprisonment already undergone by imposing fine on them. Consequently, while maintaining the conviction of each of the applicants namely, Radhey Shyam and Prem Chand under Sections 323 and 342 I. P. C., I modify their sentence of imprisonment to the period already under gone and a fine of Rs. 250/- on each of the applicants under each of the two sections, with the result that they have to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- for both the sentences. On their failure to deposit the fine within a period of three months from today, the applicants shall undergo the sentence as mentioned in the judgment of the Ilnd Additional Sessions Judge, Aligarh dated 29. 6. 1987. With this modification in the sentence, this revision stands finally disposed of. Partly allowed.;