AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Milap Chand Jain, J.—After notice to the Public Prosecutor, this revision is itself heard.
The learned Counsel for the petitioners has not challenged the conviction of the petitioners. He, however, submitted that the sentence awarded to the petitioners is severe particularly in the back ground in which the occurrence has taken place. The learned Counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the complainant teased the girl and consequently the petitioner thrashed the complainant with slaps and fists. The petitioners have remained in custody for about four days. It would be proper to reduce the sentence to the period of their custody and to impose fine on them.
Accordingly, the revision petition is partly allowed. The convictions of the petitioners are maintained. However, their substantive sentences on each count are reduced to the period of their custody and the petitioners are further sentenced to a fine of Rs. 400/- each u/s 323, IPC
The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that a month''s time may be allowed to deposit the amount. Fifteen days time is allowed for depositing the amount in the trial Court.