JUDGMENT Palok Basu, J. - Gopal, Rameshwar and Ram Nath have filed this revision against the judgment and order dated 3.10.1991 passed by the XI Additional District Judge, Agra, upholding-the conviction and sentence of the applicants. 2. Under Sections 323/34, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and six month's and three months' R. 1. respectively thereunder as passed by the Xth A. C. J. M., Agra on 30.1.91. This revision was admitted only on the question of sentence. 3. The judgment of the trial court indicates that he has placed reliance on the testimony of P.W. I Dhan Singh, P:W. 2 Mangal, P.W. 3 Matrey, P.W. 4 Dr. H.C. Pachauri, P.W. 5 head-constable Jal Singh and P.W. 6 Nahar Singh, Investigating officer. The incidents has been. fully narrated by those witnesses on whom-reliance has been placed by the magistrate which has not been interfered with in' appeal. Consequently, there is no force in this revision in so far as the merits of the case are concerned. That is why this revision was admitted only on the question of sentence. 4. It was argued by Sri Virendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicants that but for five simple injuries-four of which were only contusion and the fifth being a lacerated wound, no other injuries were sustained by the victim Dhan Singh. The incident was dated 13.8.1986. It has rightly been pointed out by Sri Singh that nearly six years have elapsed and no useful purpose will be served in asking the applicants to be sent to jail all over again particularly because of the applicants having undergone nearly a fortnight's sentence. Sri Arvind Tripathi has said that the injuries are all simple but since they were five in number no falsehood in the prosecution case exists. The injuries noted above are not only simple but are on non-vital parts and some of them appear to be insignificant. Therefore, the interest of justice do not require that the applicants should be sent back to jail again as enough time has elapsed since the incident and good relations between the parties must have come to stay. 5. In view of the aforesaid discussion this revision is dismissed with the direction that while the conviction of the applicants Gopal, Rameshwar and Ram Nath under Section 324/34, 504 and 506 (2) I.P.C: is maintained their sentence under each count is reduced to the period already under ne. 5. In view of the aforesaid discussion this revision is dismissed with the direction that while the conviction of the applicants Gopal, Rameshwar and Ram Nath under Section 324/34, 504 and 506 (2) I.P.C: is maintained their sentence under each count is reduced to the period already under ne. The applicants are on bail. They need not surrender and their bail bonds are discharged.