Deepak Roshan, J. - (1.) The instant application is directed against the judgment dated 23.07.2014 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in Criminal Appeal No.289 of 2008 whereby the appellate court has partly allowed the appeal preferred by the accused appellants reducing the sentence S.I. for 2 years passed against them by the learned Judicial Magistrate in Complaint Petition Case No.410 of 1993, T.R. No.143 of 2008 for the offence under Section 500/34 I.P.C into a fine of Rs.10,000/- against the opposite party no.2 while the another accused/opposite party no.3 namely, Vidya Devi has been acquitted from the charge.
(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned appellate court has erred in converting the sentence from simple imprisonment of 2 years into fine of Rs.10,000/- on the ground that the said accused person is very old. He has further submitted that no reason has been assigned for acquittal of accused/o.p. no.3. He further submitted that after affirming the conviction, the learned appellate court has erred in converting the imprisonment into fine.
(3.) Mr. Rajendra Kr. Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that there is no error in the order of learned appellate court because the opposite party is very old and since the conviction has been affirmed the purpose of defamation against him has been served.;