Bhagwati Prasad, C.J. - (1.) NONE appeared for the Petitioner.
(2.) THIS Revision petition has been filed against the order of the Sessions Judge, Giridih, whereby the Sessions Judge has partly allowed the appeal preferred against the judgment passed by the First Class Judicial Magistrate, Giridih. The accused persons were tried in the trial court for the offence under Section 323, 341, 427, 34 and 324 IPC. The learned Appellate court had set aside the conviction of the Appellants/Petitioners before the appellate court under Section 427/34. However, conviction of the Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 under Section 323, 341/24 was maintained and the conviction under Section 341 and 324 IPC was also upheld against all the Petitioners. The Petitioner No. 1 was found guilty under Section 324 IPC and therefore no conviction was recorded under Section 323 IPC. The Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 was granted benefit of the Probation of Offenders Act and the sentence was reduced to admonition. The sentence of Petitioner No. 1 under Section 341 IPC was also reduced to admonition. Further, the sentence against Petitioner No. 1 under Section 324 IPC was reduced to six months from one year.
(3.) THE occurrence is of 1996. We are in 2011. This Court considers that it would not be appropriate to send the accused behind the bar after so many years. In the eventuality, it is considered appropriate that instead of maintaining the sentence of imprisonment for Petitioner No. 1, a fine be imposed on him and accordingly, a fine of Rs. 5,000/ -(five thousand) is imposed on Petitioner No. 1 -Parshu Ram Mahto. If the fine is not paid within a period of three months, the original order of of sentence of six months passed by the learned Sessions Judge will come into operation and he will have to serve the sentence.;