ORDER :

1. The criminal revision petition under Section 397 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners challenging the judgment dated 10.05.2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bali in Criminal Appeal No. 8/1998, vide which, the learned appellate court upheld the conviction and sentence of the petitioners as recorded by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sumerpur in Criminal Case No. 335/1992. The trial court convicted the petitioners for offence under Sections 147 , 447 IPC and sentenced them to undergo 1 year simple imprisonment for offence under Section 147 IPC and 3 months simple imprisonment for offence under Section 447 IPC along with fine of Rs.500/- each; in default to further undergo 1 month's simple imprisonment on both counts.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that one Smt. Jarha Kanwar submitted a report at Police Station Sanderao on 28.05.1992 alleging inter alia therein that on 27.05.1992 at 7 p.m, accused-petitioners along with Hempal Singh, Mukand Singh and two other persons came to her leased and occupied plot with Koont and Bevel (a kind of native tools) and started cutting the babool trees. The complainant and her daughter Naresh Kanwar requested the accused persons not to do so, but they did not pay heed to their request and started abusing and beating them. She and her daughter went inside the house out of fear. The complainant's two sons were doing job outside and they were alone at home. The complainant also stated that in the night, the complainant and her daughter informed the police about the incident, on which, the SHO came on the spot and assured that action will be taken after receiving a report in the morning. After the police left, the accused came and started cutting the babool trees and made a new fencing by taking a large portion of her land in their share. On this report, the police registered a case for offence under Section 147 , 447 & 427/149 IPC and started investigation. After investigation, charge sheet was presented in the court. Thereafter, charges of the case were framed against the accused-petitioners, who denied the charges and claimed trial.

3. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as 6 witnesses in support of its case. Thereafter, statement of accused under section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded. No witness was examined on the defence side.

4. After considering the material available on record, the learned trial court while acquitting the accused-petitioners for offence under Section 427 IPC, convicted them for offence under Sections 147 , 447 IPC vide order dated 15.07.1998 and sentenced them, as stated above. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the accused-petitioners preferred an appeal before the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bali, which was dismissed vide judgment dt. 10.05.2002 while upholding the conviction and sentence of the petitioners. Hence, this criminal revision petition. At the threshold, learned counsel for the petitioners does not want to challenge the finding of conviction but submits that the incident pertains to year 1992. The accused-petitioners have already undergone more than 10 days imprisonment out of total imprisonment and also suffered mental agony and trauma since 1992, therefore, a lenient view may be taken and the sentence awarded to the petitioners for the aforesaid offences may be reduced to the period already undergone by them.

5. Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor has supported the judgment and order passed by the courts below and submitted there is neither any occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused-petitioners nor any compassion or sympathy is called for in the sa