ORDER S.D. Zha, J. 1.The petitioners through this revision petition confine their challenge only to sentence of one month RI and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, further two months' RI awarded by the JMFC, Shajapur by judgment dated 31-7-1990 and upheld in appeal by Sessions Judge, Shajapur by judgment dated 12-9-1990. 2. The present petitioners along with deceased Jagannath and accused Badrinath who was released on probation by the trial Court were prosecuted by Sundarsi Police Station for offence under, Sections 147, 148, 325/149, Indian Penal Code. The prosecution story was that on 5-5-1988 in the evening they formed unlawful assembly and were armed with deadly weapons and used force and in furtherance of common object of unlawful assembly grievous hurt was caused to complainant Narayansingh. The accused persons pleaded not guilty to charge and denied any role in the alleged offence. They were, however, found guilty and convicted under Sections 325/149, Indian Penal Code and 148, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer one month RI and fine of Rs. 500/- each, in default two months' further RI on first count and imprisonment till rising of Court on the second count. The judgment was upheld in appeal by the Sessions Judge. 3. At the hearing of the appeal, Shri Amarsingh, learned counsel representing the petitioners did not challenge conviction of the appellants under Sections 325/149, Indian Penal Code and 148, Indian Penal Code. He also did not challenge the sentence of imprisonment till rising of Court awarded for conviction under Section 148, Indian Penal Code. He submitted that accused/petitioners be given benefit of probation or in the alternative the sentence of imprisonment may be reduced to the period already undergone and if considered just and proper, the sentence of fine may be suitably enhanced. 4. Shri G. Desai learned Panel Lawyer for the State had no particular comments to make on the request. 5. The Judicial Magistrate awarded the sentence of one month RI for conviction under Section 325, Indian Penal Code which is fairly serious offence. The Judicial Magistrate would have done well to go through Chapter 10 of the 'Rules and Orders (Criminal) for the guidance of criminal Courts', paras 259 and 276 before he awarded such a lenient sentence for a serious offence of grievous hurt punishable under Section 325, Indian Penal Code. The Judicial Magistrate would have done well to go through Chapter 10 of the 'Rules and Orders (Criminal) for the guidance of criminal Courts', paras 259 and 276 before he awarded such a lenient sentence for a serious offence of grievous hurt punishable under Section 325, Indian Penal Code. What has been observed in para 276 with reference to offences against property would be equally true in respect of offence against person. A short period of imprisonment increases the probability that a casual offender may become a habitual offender. As observed by the Supreme Court in B. C. Goswami v. Delhi Administration, too lenient as well as too harsh sentences both lose their efficaciousness. One does not deter and the other may frustrate thereby making the offender a hardened criminal. In the present revision petition, however, the State has not come up in revision or appeal for enhancement of sentence against the sentence of one month RI awarded for conviction under Section 325, Indian Penal Code or for that matter for imprisonment till rising of Court awarded for conviction under Section 148, Indian Penal Code. No notice for enhancement of sentence was issued to the petitioners and, therefore, at this stage, it would not be proper to issue notice to the petitioners to show cause why the sentence awarded be not enhanced and then enhance the sentence. 6. Shri Amarsingh learned counsel has challenged only sentence of imprisonment awarded for conviction under Section 325, Indian Penal Code and not imprisonment till rising of Court awarded for conviction under Section 148, Indian Penal Code. The petitioners have served three days in prison. No useful purpose would be served by sending them back to prison to serve short term of 27 days' rigorous imprisonment. 7. Considering the foregoing, the sentence of one month RI awarded to each of the petitioners is reduced to period already undergone. The sentence of Rs. 500/- fine is enhanced to Rs. 1,000/-, in default of the payment of fine, the petitioners shall suffer four months' RI each. Out of fine if realised Rs. 1,500/- shall be paid as compensation to injured Narayansingh s/o Datarsingh. The revision petition is disposed of accordingly.