- (1.) B. K. Rathi, J. Heard Sri S. D. Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A. G. A.
(2.) THIS revision has been preferred by the applicant under Sections 397 and 401, Cr. P. C. against the judgment and order dated 30-3-99, passed by 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar. The facts giving rise to the present revision are as follows. The both appellants/applicants were convicted for of fence under Sections 323 and 324, IPC by the Magistrate. Against their conviction the appellants preferred a criminal appeal No. 75/97, which was decided by the im pugned order. The conviction under Sec tion 324/504, I. P. C. was set aside, however the conviction under Section 323, I. P. C. was maintained and a sentence of three months simple imprisonment was awarded to each of the appellants. Aggrieved by it the present revision has been preferred. There are two injured persons, I do not find any illegality and impropriety in the impugned order. The witnesses of fact have supported the case and their state ments are corroborated by the medical evidence.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the applicants requested that the sentence may be con verted into a sentence of fine. I accept the request. The sentence under Section 323, IPC is converted into a sentence of fine and each of the appellant/applicant is directed to pay a fine of Rs. 1500. However, in default of payment of fine they shall undergo imprisonment as awarded by the appellate Court. The revision is disposed of accord ingly. Revision disposed of. .;