JUDGMENT 1. - Counsel for the petitioner does not press the revision so far as it relates to the conviction. He pleads that if the Hon'ble Court deems it proper, then the accused-petitioner may be ordered to pay compensation to the injured. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the accused has been awarded six months sentence and he is behind the bar. In this view of the matter, it would not be appropriate if the accused serves complete jail sentence after 5 years from the date of incident. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor though does not agree on this proposition that the sentence of jail should be converted into sentence of fine, but he considers that it would not be appropriate to serve the complete sentence. 3. Looking to all the facts and circumstances of the case, it is ordered that in case, accused-petitioner deposits a sum of Rs. 5,000/- to be paid to the injured, the substantive sentence awarded to the accused-petitioner will be deemed to have been converted into the sentence of fine and he will be released forthwith. If the amount is not deposited within three weeks, the trial Court may remand the accused to jail to serve out remaining sentence awarded to him. The revision petition is accordingly disposed of.Revision partly allowed. *******