Shiv kumar Sharma, J. - (1.) -Accused petitioners have been convicted and sentenced as under- Mathura Lal - Under Section 326 IPC to undergo 6 months Rl and fine of Rs. 500/-. Under Section 324/34 IPC to undergo 4 months Rl and fine of Rs.100/- Under Section 323/34 IPC to undergo 3 months Rl and fine of Rs.100/'-. Ram Nath-Under Section 326/34 IPC to undergo 6 months Rl and fine of Rs.500/-. Under Section 324 IPC to undergo 4 months Rl and fine of Rs. 100/-. Under Section 323 IPC to undergo 3 months Rl and fine of Rs. 100/- Bheru Lal-Under Section 326/34 IPC to undergo 6 months Rl and fine of Rs.500/-. Under Section 324/34 IPC to undergo 4 months Rl and fine of Rs.100/-. Under Section 323 IPC to undergo 3 months Rl and fine of Rs.100/- Sentences awarded to the accused shall run concurrently.
(2.) The only contention of learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is that in the facts and circumstances of the case the sentence already undergone would meet the ends of justice. Reliance was placed on Khatanmal v. State of Rajasthan (1989 RCC 219) Damodar v. State (1989 RCC 105) and Kajod v. State (1993 RCC 456).
(3.) Learned PR on the other hand supported the impugned judgment.;