Patna High CourtCR. REV./1173/2016disposed

Rajendra Rai And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2017-08-30Mr. Justice Arun Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Revision No.1173 of 2016 ======================================================

1. Rajendra Rai, Son of Shri Ramam Rai,

2. Raman Rai, Son of Late Dhaneshwar Rai, Both are resident of Village- Pachpokharia, P.S.- Chhauradano, DistrictEast Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr. Advocate. Mr. Anuj Kumar, Advocate.

Mrs. Priyanka Singh, Advocate.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 30-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

This revision application is preferred against the judgment and order dated 15.09.2016 passed by the Additional District Judge-IV, Motihari, East Champaran in Cr. Appeal No. 79 of 1990 whereby he has upheld the order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court in Trial No. 670 of 1990 arising out Chhauradano P.S.Case No. 59 of 1985. Both petitioners have been convicted under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo six month of rigorous imprisonment. In the argument, the learned counsel assails the judgment only on the point of sentence.

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1173 of 2016 (8) dt.30-08-2017 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that alleged occurrence is of the year 1985, more than 40 years have elapsed since the occurrence and the informant and accused persons both are next door neighbours and petitioners have remained in custody for a month and have suffered the rigorous of trial; so period of sentence may be modified from sentence of six moth to period already undergone.

Having considered the submission and on perusal of record, it is evident that the informant and the accused personspetitioners of this revision application are next door neighbours and due to filling of land offence of simple assault was committed. Moreover this occurrence was committed way back in the year 1985 and the petitioners have already suffered rigorous of trial for a long period, so upholding the conviction against the petitioners under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, period of sentence is modified to one month of simple imprisonment setting of period of sentence already undergone. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of.

(Arun Kumar, J) Sujit/- U