The court considered the age and lack of criminal antecedents of the applicant in determining the appropriate sentence, highlighting the importance of these factors in sentencing decisions.

ORDER

U.C. Maheshwari, J.

1. This revision is directed on behalf of the applicant/accused, being aggrieved by the judgment dated 9.5.2011 passed by the 8th Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Rewa in Criminal Appeal No. 109/10 whereby dismissing his appeal, the judgment dated 31.3.2010 passed by the JMFC Teothar, Rewa in Criminal Case No. 1139/07 convicting and sentencing the applicant under Section 324 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for RI one year with fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of depositing such fine amount, further one month SI in the earlier section while with fine of Rs. 800/-, in default of depositing the same, further one month SI in the later has been affirmed.

2. The facts giving rise to this revision in short are that the complainant/victim Chetan Singh lodged the report with police station Jawa, district Rewa on dated 28.2.2007 contending that at about 12.30, he accompanied with Amol Singh, went to their field at village Paruhan Tola, Dagdiya, which is situated near the agricultural field of one Ramanand Dubey. As soon as they reached to the field, they were asked by Ramanand Dubey with filthy language why they have come there. Ramanand Dubey was lashed with a rifle. On asking the complainant and Amol Singh, not to abuse them, Ramanand gave a threat to kill them. At the same time, the applicant Bablu, lashed with Farsa came there and gave its blow on the head of Amol Singh, consequently, he fell down. The complainant ran to rescue him, then he was also subjected to blow of stick by Babban, Anil, Ramanand and present applicant along with one more person whose name was not known to the complainant. Amol Singh was also subjected to beating by such accused with legs and fists. On shouting by the victim, the alleged witnesses, Ramniranjan, Kundan Singh and other persons came to the place of incident, on which, the applicant and other accused fled away from such place. In the alleged incident both the victims sustained injuries on different parts of their person.

3. After lodging the report, they were sent to hospital, where their MLC report was prepared according to which complainant Chetan Singh sustained one lacerated wound on his head, two contusions on right shoulder and the left fore-arm respectively and one abrasion on the right scapular region. So far injury No. 2 and 3 are concerned, he was referred for x-ray also but on carrying-out the same, No. fracture was found on such injury while on the person of victim Amol Singh, one incised wound in front of the head measuring 2x2x1.5 cms and two contusions with swelling respectively on right wrist and on nose, were found. He was referred for x-ray regarding injury No. 1 and 2. On carrying out the same, in injury No. 1 some fracture was found by Dr. R.L. Singh (PW 2) but on sending the x-ray plate to Dr. P.D. Mahant (PW 3) for second opinion then as per his opinion Ex.P/12, No. bony injury was found in such x-ray plate. After receiving such medical and x-ray report and also on completion of the investigation, the accused persons, were charge-sheeted for the offence under Section 294, 323, 506-B and 324/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

4. On framing the charges, the applicant along with other accused, abjured the same, on which, the trial was held. On appreciation of the same, besides the other co-accused, the applicant was held guilty for the offence under Section 324 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in which he was punished with the above mentioned sentence. On filing the appeal along with other co-accused, the same was dismissed, on which, the applicant has come forward to this Court with this revision while No. revision of the other applicants, has been placed before me for any consideration.

5. Without challenging the findings of the courts below holding conviction against the applicant for the above mentioned offence, the applicant's counsel has made his limited submissions for reducing the jail sentence of the applicant from one year RI upto the per