JUDGMENT Heard and the Criminal Appeal is disposed of in the follow¬ing manner. 2. Appellants were the accused persons in Sessions Trial No.15 of 1988 (S.C. 54 of 1988 GDC). Accused persons faced the trial for the offence under Sections 302/149, I.P.C. in the Court of 1st. Additional Sessions Judge, Berhampur on the allegation that on 22.5.1983 at about 8 P.M. all the accused persons forming unlawful assembly and being armed with weapons came and attacked Laxmi Pradhan, the deceased. Trial was preceded with that accusation because of the plea of denial of the accused persons. In course of trial, prosecution examined 12 witnesses relied on Exts.1 to 18/1 as documentary evidence and M.Os I to XI as material objects to substantiate the charge. Learned Additional Sessions Judge on appreciation of the said evidence together with the defence plea found that the fact of constituting unlawful assembly and fact of assault on the deceased are proved. But there being provocation from the deceased for the aforesaid purpose and the accused persons having no intention to kill him, the offence which is made out against the appellants is under Section 324/149, I.P.C. Regarding such offence, the trial Court convicted the appellants and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. 3. It is stated at the Bar that Government has not pre¬ferred any appeal challenging to the order of acquittal for the offence under Section 302/149, I.P.C. Learned counsel for the appellants after placing the judgment and the evidence finds no lacuna in the impugned order so as to interfere with the same. Therefore, as an alternative remedy he asked for imposing the sentence of fine on the ground that there has been a considera¬ble lapse of time in between. Learned Standing Counsel however argues that substantive sentence should be there, when the ulti¬mate result of the assault occasioned in death of the deceased. It is also noticed that at the time when the appeal was admitted, no notice was given for enhancement of sentence. 4. Regard being had to the aforesaid facts and submission and the lapse of time from the date of occurrence in the year 1983, it is felt appropriate that in view of the penal provision in Section 324 authorizing the Court to impose substantative sentence or sentence of fine, or both. 4. Regard being had to the aforesaid facts and submission and the lapse of time from the date of occurrence in the year 1983, it is felt appropriate that in view of the penal provision in Section 324 authorizing the Court to impose substantative sentence or sentence of fine, or both. This Court maintain the order of conviction, but modify the sentence by directing each of the accused-appellants to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- (Two thousand) and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 1 & 1/2 year each. Such fine amount be paid within a period of two months or else appropriate procedure be followed for realization of the same and to execute the default sentence. On payment of fine, the entire amount be paid to the legal heirs of the de¬ceased. The Criminal Appeal is dismissed with modification of sen¬tence. Crl. appeal dismissed with modification of sentence.