R. K. AGRAWAL, J. ( 1 ) ADDITIONAL Sessions Judge, Faizabad by his order dated 9/11/1982 has dismissed the appeal No. 270/82 confirming the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Magistrate in Criminal Case No. 1376/ 1981 convicting the accused persons for offence under sections 323/34 and 452 IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo R. I. for three months under section 323/34 IPC and three months under section 452 IPC and further sentencing each of them to pay a fine of Rs. 200. 00 in default to three / months R. I u/s. 452 IPC. ( 2 ) ACCORDING to the prosecution case Banshgopal complainant was sitting in his Dalan on 17/4/1981 at about 11 A. M. when four persons including the two revisionists, who have previous enmity with the complainant, came there and hurled abuses and attacked them with lath is, Danda, kick and fists causing injuries to the complainant and his wife. First Information report of the incident was lodged the same: day at 10 p. m. Both the injured were medically examined by Dr. L. A. Khan. The complainant had one lacerated wound and a contusion and his wife had a complaint of pain. In support of its case the prosecution examined complainant Bansh Gopal PW. 2, Smt. Kailashi complainants wife PW. 3 and Ram Naresh PW. 4 on fact, besides other formal witnesses. The learned trial Magistrate and the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted and. sentenced the accused revisionists as mentioned above. ( 3 ) THE learned counsel for the revisionists argued only on the question of sentence. The evidence on record is sufficient the establish the prosecution case on fact. ( 4 ) THE incident had taken place in the year 1981; Parties are Pattidar: There was some dispute between them on account of Pattidari. The accused had attacked the complainant and his wife with lathis, Dandas Kicks and fists. Both the parties are living in the same very village; since the time of occurrence no complaint from either side was raised against the accused: The revisionists have also undergone a part of sentence. Thus after lapse of about 12 years it would be quite hazardous to send the revisionists to jail. ( 5 ) TAKING into consideration all these facts and circumstances, therefore, the order of sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period of sentence already undergone. Thus after lapse of about 12 years it would be quite hazardous to send the revisionists to jail. ( 5 ) TAKING into consideration all these facts and circumstances, therefore, the order of sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period of sentence already undergone. ( 6 ) THE appeal is allowed in part. The order of conviction is maintained while the order of imprisonment is reduced to the period of sentence already undergone. The fine imposed by the learned Magistrate shall be paid within three months from to day. In default of payment of fine the accused would undergo the sentence imposed by the learned Magistrate. Out of the fine realised Rs. 300. 00 (rupee three hundred) shall be paid to the complainant Bansh Gopal PW. 2. Revision allowed partly. .