RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J. - (1.) Heard Mr. S. K. Ughal, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Shekhar Sinha, learned A.P.P. for the State.
(2.) This application is directed against the judgment dated 22.09.2004 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 58 of 1998 by learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Giridih, whereby and whereunder, the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 18.08.1998 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Giridih, in G.R. Case No. 1490 of 1990 (T.R.No. 58 of of 1998), convicting the petitioners for the offences punishable u/s 326/149, 323/149, 325/149, 337/149 and 147 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to various terms, has been affirmed.
(3.) It has been stated by Mr. S. K. Ughal, learned counsel for the petitioners that there was a land dispute which led to institution of the present F.I.R. It has further been submitted that the most of the witnesses are related witnesses and their evidence being not trustworthy, the same cannot be relied upon. It has also been submitted that arising out of the same incident a case had also been instituted against the informant party in which they were convicted and sentenced by learned trial court, however considering the nature of allegation they were released under the Probation of Offenders Act . An alternative argument has advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners that if this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment of conviction, the period of sentence be modified, considering the fact that the petitioners are facing rigours of criminal case since 1990 and they have remained in custody for some time.;