Shree Chandrashekhar, J. - (1.) The petitioners are aggrieved of judgment dated 07.06.2017 by which Criminal Appeal No. 13 of 2014 preferred by them against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed in G.R. Case No. 1671 of 2008 corresponding to T.R. Case No. 1117 of 2014 has been dismissed.
(2.) Briefly stated, the petitioners were put on trial in Jarmundi P.S. Case No. 258 of 2008 which was registered for the offences under Section 147, 148, 149, 448, 379 and 504 I.P.C. During the trial, the prosecution has examined as many as six witnesses; P.W 5 is the informant and P.W 6 is the investigating officer. The dispute between the parties pertains to harvest of the paddy crops in the field of the informant. On the basis of the evidences led during the trial, the trial Judge has found the accused persons guilty and accordingly, convicted them for the offences under Section 448, 379 and 504 I.P.C. They have, however, been extended the benefits under Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act and they were directed to execute a bond of Rs. 5000/- each for a period not exceeding three years. Their appeal vide Criminal Appeal No. 13 of 2014 has been dismissed.
(3.) Mr. Manoj Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioners contends that once place of occurrence has not been established by the prosecution, the entire prosecution case must fail.;