Judgment I.P.Singh, J. 1. Appellants Balmiki Singh, Ram Briksha Singh and Sidheshwar Singh have been convicted under section 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years each. Appellants Shri Kant Singh, Satish Singh, Anuj Singh alias Bajo Singh, Arun Singh and Upendra Singh have been released under the provision of Probation of Offenders Act and have been directed to execute a bond of Rs. 2000/- to keep peace and tranquility for a period of one year. 2. The prosecution case, in short, is that the informant Badri Singh gave his Fardbeyan before the police at Akbarpur Hospital at 9.00 P.M. of 24th April, 1987, stating, inter alia, that while he was returning his home from his school at about 4.30 P.M. and when he reached near the field of onion situated at Govindpur, he saw one she goat of Ramswaroop Singh was grazing in the field. It has been stated that he wanted to catch the goat but in the meantime the appellants forcibly armed with weapons came there and surrounded him. It has been stated that Ram Swaroop Singh and Ram Briksha Singh were armed with Garasa and appellant Upender Singh and appellant Satish Singh were armed with Saif and the other appellants were armed with Lathi. Ramswaroop ordered to kill the informant Badari Singh whereupon Ram Briksha Singh assaulted him by means of Garasa. Appellants Anuj Singh and Upender Singh assaulted him with Saif and Satish and Balmiki Singh assaulted him with Garasa on his head. The informant fell down and thereafter the other appellants also assaulted him with Lathi. It has been stated that when his brothers Dashrath Singh and Brijnandan Singh came to save him, they were also assaulted. It has been further alleged that appellant Ram Briksha Singh took away Rs. 500/- from the pocket of the informant. Thereafter the injured were taken to hospital and on the basis of the Fardbeyan first information report was drawn up. The police after completion of investigation submitted charge sheet against the appellants. Accordingly cognizance was taken and case was committed to the court of sessions where the trial concluded with the result as stated above. The appellants pleaded not guilty. 3. The prosecution in support of its case examined altogether nine witnesses. The police after completion of investigation submitted charge sheet against the appellants. Accordingly cognizance was taken and case was committed to the court of sessions where the trial concluded with the result as stated above. The appellants pleaded not guilty. 3. The prosecution in support of its case examined altogether nine witnesses. P.W. 1 is Dashrath Singh, own brother of the informant, P.W. 2 is Badri Singh, informant of the case, P.W. 3 is Brajnandan Singh, brother of the informant, P.W. 4 is Bundal Rajwar, P.W. 5 is Lakhan Singh, a tendered witness, P.W. 6 is Arjun Singh, P.W. 7 is Dr. Ali Sikander Afzer Haque, P.W. 8 is Nageshwar Singh, I.O. of the case and P.W. 9 is Ramprit Prasad, a formal witness. The defence has also examined one witness, D.W. 1 Anandi Singh. 4. The informant P.W. 2, Badari Singh has fully supported the case of the prosecution, as narrated in the Fardbeyan. According to him on 24.4.87 while he was returning from his school and he reached near the field of onion he saw one she goat of Ram Swaroop Singh was grazing in the field. He wanted to catch the goat but in the meantime all the appellants variously armed came and assualted him. He fell down and became unconscious. He has also stated that Ram Swaroop ordered to kill him and thereupon the other appellants assaulted him. According to him, when his brother Dashrath and Brijnandan came to save him they were also assaulted by the appellants. The witnesses came and he along with two brothers was taken to hospital where they were treated and his fardbeyan was recorded by the S.I. of Police at Akbarpur Hospital at 9 P.M. P.W. 1 has also supported the case of the prosecution. According to him, when he was reading the news paper at his Baitheka, he heard Nulla. He hurriedly went to the onion field. He saw the appellants assaulting his brother Badari with Garasa, Saif and Lathi. According to him, when he and his brother Brijnandan went to save him they were also assaulted by the appellants with Saif which cut his left little finger. He has also stated thet appellant Anuj assaulted twice with a Saif which injured his wrist joint and also right hand and head. According to him, when he and his brother Brijnandan went to save him they were also assaulted by the appellants with Saif which cut his left little finger. He has also stated thet appellant Anuj assaulted twice with a Saif which injured his wrist joint and also right hand and head. According to him, the reason behind the occurrence was thet the goat of Ramanuj Singh entered in his field and when the informant, his brother Badari caught hold of goat and he was taking it to Kanji House the appellants came and they were assaulted. The injured Brijnandan has also supported the version of the informant and injured P.W. 1 Dashrath. The investigating officer of the case has also stated thet he visited the place of occurrence and also he recorded the Fardbeyan of the informant in the hospital and prepared injury memo of the injured persons. He has given the full description of the place of occurrence. According to him, he did not find blood stains in the field. 5. P.W. 7 Dr. Ali Sikander Afzar Haque had examined the injured persons on 24.4.1987. He found the following injuries on the person of Badari Singh : (I) Incised wound over the left side of skull measuring 4" x 1/2" bone deep. (II) Incised wound over the back of skull measuring 4" x 1/2" bone deep. (III) Incised wound over right side of skull measuring 2 1/2" x 1/2" x bone deep. (IV) Incised wound over the right side of skull measuring 2" x 1/2" x bone deep. According to the doctor, all the injuries were simple in nature caused by sharp weapon, may be Garasa and Saif. On the same day he also examined injured P.W. 1 Dasharath Singh and found the following injuries on his person : (I) Lacerated wound over skull front portion measuring 1/2" x 1/4" x 1/8". (II) Lacerated wound over right fore arm measuring 1/4" x 1/4" x 1/4". (III) Cut wound over left little finger measuring 1/2" x 1/4" x cutting of flangial bone with only skin on opposite side. (iv) Lacerated wound over left hand measuring 1" x 1/4" x 1/8". In the opinion of the doctor injury nos. 1, 2 and 4 were simple, injury no. 3 grievance in nature. Injury nos. 1 and 4 caused by hard and blunt substance - may be blunt portion of Saif and Lathi. (iv) Lacerated wound over left hand measuring 1" x 1/4" x 1/8". In the opinion of the doctor injury nos. 1, 2 and 4 were simple, injury no. 3 grievance in nature. Injury nos. 1 and 4 caused by hard and blunt substance - may be blunt portion of Saif and Lathi. Injury no. 2 caused by sharp and pointed weapon may be Saif. Injury no. 3 by sharp weapon such as Saif. On 25.4.87 the same doctor examined Brijnandan Singh and found the following injuries on his person : (I) Contusion and swelling over right force arm measuring 1" x 1/2", (II) Contusion and swelling over right side of skull measuring 1" x 1/2". Both injuries were simple and caused by hard and blunt substance like Lathi. 6 Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted thet there was a case and counter case and the appellants as well as the family members were also assaulted by the informant and other witnesses. It has been further submitted thet the matter has been settled outside the court and a compromise petition has been filed on behalf of both the parties. 7. From the deposition of the witnesses it is evident thet the occurrence took place and the genesis of the occurrence is said to be grazing of onion field. However the investigating officer did not find any sign of grazing in the field. But, it is clear thet the witnesses P.Ws. 1 and 3 also got injuries and there is ample evidence to show thet the appellants assaulted the injured P.Ws. 1, 3 and also the informant with Garasa, Saif and Lathi which caused incised injury on the person of the informant. According to the doctor all the injuries inflicted by the appellants on Badari and Brijnanaan were simple in nature but injury no. 3 inflicted on the person of P.W. 1 Dasharath was grievous. His little finger was also cut. 8. From the discussions made above it is clear thet the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and the court below has rightly convicted the appellants under section 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code. 9. 3 inflicted on the person of P.W. 1 Dasharath was grievous. His little finger was also cut. 8. From the discussions made above it is clear thet the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and the court below has rightly convicted the appellants under section 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code. 9. Coming to the question of sentence and in the facts and circumstances of the case and also the submnissions so raised on behalf of the appellants thet now the matter has been settled outside the court and the parties have restored good relation between them and there is a case and counter case in which the appellants were also assaulted. I am of the view thet it will be expedient in the interest of justice if the sentence of appellant nos. 6, 7 and 8, namely, Balmiki Singh, Ram Briksha Singh and Sidheshwar Singh are reduced to the period they have already undergone in jail with a fine of Rs. 500/- to be deposited by them within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. It is made clear thet the amount of fine if and when realised from these appellants, it shall be paid to the injured informant Badari Singh, Dasharath Singh and Brijnandan Singh. Appellants Shri Kant Singh, Satish Singh, Anuj Singh alias Bajo Singh, Arjun Singh and Upender Singh have been released under Probation of Offenders Act and have been directed to execute bond of Rs. 2000/- each to keep peace and tranquility for a period of one year. The said order passed by the court below for execution of bond is maintained. Since section 307 of the Indian Penal Code is not compoundable, the compromise petition filed by the appellants is not acceptable and the same is rejected. With the modification in sentence, as stated above, this appeal stands dismissed.