Mandhata Singh, J. – Prosecution case initiated on fard-bayan of one Umesh Singh in brief is that on 16.7.1986 in the morning, petitioner went to his field for getting the same ploughed, reached there at 8.30 A.M., saw 20-25 persons cutting maize crop from his field, on objection appellant Ramashish Singh ordered to kill and shot a firing from his gun, thereafter rest of the accused-appellants came out from the maize crop variously armed with Lathi, Bhala, Farsa and Gun assaulted the informant. There is further specification that ‘Gadasa’ was blown by accused Sadhu Saran Singh since deceased, Vijay Singh assaulted by means of ‘Saif’, informant’s brother Ram Badan and Ram Lakhan came there who were also assaulted by the accused persons. Purchase of land is said reason behind the occurrence. Assault is said caused with intention to kill. 2. After conclusion of the trial, accused-appellants are convicted either for the offence under Section 323 of the I.P.C. or Section 323 read with Section 149 of the I.P.C. Though, an attempt was made on behalf of learned counsel for the appellants that conviction was not justified if contradiction between the witnesses and filing of Barbigha P.S. Case No.100 of 1986 on their behalf against member of informant party is taken into consideration, but ultimately preferred to maintain on the point of sentence only. In this case, appellants were ordered to furnish probation bond, but according to learned counsel in the year 1999, there is alternate provision under the Probation of Offenders Act to release the appellants on admonition. In my view also, admonition is only now sufficient for the sentence. 3. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed. The Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence dated 18.6.1999 is affirmed with modification that instead of furnishing probation bond appellants are released after due admonition.