IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1793 of 2009 SATENDRA YADAV,son of Ramshrup Yadav,resident of village-Karhara (Tola Raghupur),P.S.-Aurangabad(Muf.),District- Aurangabad(Bihar) Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 03/ 17-12-2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. This revision application has been filed against the judgment dated 16-09-2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge- IV, Aurangabad in Cr.Appeal No.72 of 2000/43 of 2009, by which he has dismissed the appeal reducing the sentence from one year to six months and affirming the judgment and order dated 24-08-2000 passed by the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad in G.R.No.493 of 1997, Tr.No.229 of 2000, whereby petitioner has been convicted and awarded sentence to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. Learned counsel for the petitioner presses the sentence only and on that point his submission is that petitioner had no concern with sale of the seized wine, rather Baijnath Prasad Singh was a licensee present also but recovery of eleven pouches of wine is established by the trial court as well as by the appellate court. No doubt, quantity of the wine was megre and licensee was present while the seizure was made. So, to my view also petitioner appears entitle for some relief on the point of sentence. So, this revision application is partly allowed on the point of sentence only, which is modified to the minimum sentence of three months while conviction is affirmed. 2 Let the order be communicated to the court below through fax at the cost of the petitioner. AH/ ( Mandhata Singh, J. )