ORDER : V.R. Krishna Iyer, J. - The 1st appellant ? Raj Bahadur ? is found to be a teenager (16/17) at the time of the commission of the offence. We consider that the offence itself being one under Section 304 Part I and the circumstances present having an element of provocation and justification, the sentence deserves to be reduced in his case. He has already undergone a little over three years' rigorous imprisonment in prison and we consider that the period undergone will be adequate to meet the ends of justice. He will, therefore, be released forthwith. The 2nd appellant (petitioner Harish Chandra) was also only 20 years old at the time of the commission of the offence and having regard to the facts found by the courts below that there was private defence but it had been exceeded, we think that the sentence may justicially be reduced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment. 2. We have refused leave in regard to the 1st petitioner ? Vishwa Nath ? in the special leave petition since no question of reducing the sentence arises in his case. He was convicted under Section 302 Indian Penal Code. Even so, we think it right, having regard to the age of that petitioner and the other special features of this case that the State may be meeting the ends of justice by substantially remitting the sentence. We also understand, on counsel's representation, that there is an institution run by the State where offenders in the late teenage group are sent for rehabilitation, instead of being kept in adult prisons where contamination by more chronic offenders is likely to take place. We need hardly say that the State will properly deal with the 1st petitioner by sending him to that institution so that he may have an opportunity to turn a new leaf in life.