- (1.) KUNDAN Singh, J. Heard Sri M. Islam, counsel for the applicants and the learned AG. a
(2.) THIS revision has been directed against the judgment and order, dated 8-7-1984 passed by Sri U. S. Gupta, Sessions Judge, Bareily in Criminal Appeal No. 125 of 1984 whereby the appeal of the applicants was dismissed and the conviction under Sec tions 323 and 324 read with Section 34 I. P. C. and sentence of simple imprisonment for three months and four months on each count awarded to the applicants by the Judi cial Magistrate, Baheri in criminal case No. 112 of 1982 were affirmed. The applicants at about 7:30 a. m. on 10-5-1982started hurlringabuses in frontof the house of the complainant Sharafat Husain in Shishgarh town. When the com plainant protested, applicant Sabir brought a lathi and applicant Shafiq came armed with a Tabal and started assaulting him. When Smt. Mariam, mother-in-law of Sharafat Hussain arrived to save him, she was also assaulted by lathi and Tabal. The injuries of the injured persons were ex amined. On the person of Smt. Mariam the doctor found one contusion 3 cm x 1 cm on left wrist posterior and one incised wound 4 cm x 0. 3 cm x 0. 3 cm on the middle one-third of the right leg laterally oblique and Sharafat Hussain sustained three con tusions on his toe. The prosecution ex amined P. W. 5 Sharafat Hussain and P. W. 6 Smt. Mariam as the witnesses of the factum of the incident besides other formal wit nesses. The trial Court believed the evidence and held the applicants guilty of the offences charged with and convicted and sentenced them as stated above. Aggrived by the aforesaid judgment the applicants preferred their appeal before the Sessions Judge, Bareily who after going through the record dismissed the appeal upholding the conviction and sentence of the applicants as awarded by the trial Court. The applicants have come up before this Court against their conviction and sentence by filing the present revision.
(3.) THE learned counsel for the ap plicants could not point out any illegality or infirmity in the judgments and orders passed by the courts below. In the last the learned counsel for the applicants submitted on the point of quantum of the sentence awarded by the trial Court and also affirmed by the Sessions Judge. He submitted that the applicants had been convicted and sentenced for a trifling incidence which took place in the month of May, 1982. He also drew the attention of the Court towards the injuries sustained by the injured persons. In view of the location and dimension of the injuries the injured per sons did not sustain any substantial injury and the injuries sustained by them are only of very trifling nature and it would not be proper to send the applicants behind the bars after such a long time. He, therefore, prayed that the sentence of the applicants may be reduced to the period already under gone.;