Prolonged litigation justified reducing simple-hurt imprisonment to time served and imposing fines.

The appellants were convicted under Section 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to six months’ simple imprisonment for assaulting the informant and others

Appellant No. 2, Krishna Yadav, died during the appeal, which abated as against him

The surviving appellants did not challenge their convictions and confined the appeal to sentence, relying on the age of the case, the period already spent in custody, and their family circumstances

The State opposed interference with the sentence

1. Whether the sentences imposed on the surviving appellants under Section 323/34 IPC should be reduced to the period already undergone, having regard to the circumstances advanced in mitigation.

2. Whether the conviction should be disturbed when the appellants did not challenge it on appeal.

Section 323 IPC was the basis for the appellants’ conviction and sentence for voluntarily causing hurt, while Section 34 IPC was applied to their acts done in furtherance of common intention.

The Court considered the appellants’ individual periods of custody, the time elapsed since the 2006 occurrence, and their family circumstances when determining whether to modify the sentence.

Because the appellants expressly confined their challenge to sentence, the Court did not examine the correctness of the convictions on their merits.

In considering sentence, it noted that the occurrence was nearly two decades old; appellant No. 1 had spent one month and ten days in custody, appellant No. 3 eight days, and appellant No. 4 none. It also considered that the appellants were the sole breadwinners of their families.

The Court held that the ends of justice would be met by reducing the custodial terms for appellants Nos. 1 and 3 to the periods already undergone, and by imposing a fine on each surviving appellant; for appellant No. 4, who had served no custody, it substituted a fine for imprisonment.

For appellants Nos. 1 and 3, the six-month sentences were reduced to the periods already undergone, with a fine of ₹1,000 each. For appellant No. 4, the imprisonment was replaced by a fine of ₹1,000.

Each fine was to be deposited within two months of receipt of the judgment by the trial court; the appellants, being on bail, were discharged from their bail bonds.