IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Revision No.196 of 2003 Gurbachan Singh S/o Late Sri Gokul Singh R/o Hospital Road, Vikas Nagar Dehradun. ………. Revisionist Versus State of Uttaranchal ..…. Respondent Present : Sri C.K. Sharma, Advocate present for the revisionist. . Sri Hari Om Bhakuni, Brief holder for the State. Dated : 11th August, 2011 Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. This revision has been directed against judgment and order dated 28.11.2003 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Uttarkashi in Criminal appeal No.26 of 2000 Gurbachan Singh Vs. State. The said appeal was preferred against judgment and order dated 07.09.2000 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Uttarkashi whereby the revisionist Gurbachan Singh was found guilty for the offence under section 411 IPC, wherefore he was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year nay fine of Rs.1,000/-. Having heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned Brief holder for the State, this Court is of the view that there is no inconsistency or material irregularity in either of the judgments of the court below nor any glaring contradiction in the evidence adduced in the trial court could be pointed out by learned counsel for the revisionist before this Court. Revisionist is a shopkeeper of Vikasnagar District Dehradun while incident relates to District Uttarkashi wherefrom a statue of Renuka Devi was stolen from a temple and that was recovered from the possession of the revisionist. The revisionist was found in 2 possession of that idol in the shop, which was recovered by Investigating Officer after taking search warrant from the Magistrate. These facts have been duly proved by the prosecution against revisionist Gurbachan Singh. Since no illegality has been pointed out in the judgment rendered by learned trial court as well as Appellate court, hence, this revision on merit has no force and is liable to be dismissed. Learned counsel for the revisionist prays that sentence of imprisonment can be converted to that of the fine. He also drew attention of the Court to the fact that revisionist has already gone to jail and remained in caption at the time of first remand as well as after failure of his appeal. This way he has been under incarceration for a period of 47 days. In the above circumstances, when the incident is also of February,1999 and Gurbachan Singh is facing the trial as well as legal proceedings at different stages for last 13 years, the end of justice will be met if sentence of one year’s rigorous imprisonment be converted to that of period already undergone as stated above and fine of Rs.1,000/- is enhanced to that of Rs.30,000/-. The revision is partly allowed on the question of sentence. The sentence is converted from one year imprisonment to that of already undergone by the revisionist and fine of Rs.1000/- is enhanced to that of Rs.30,000/-. If he fails to deposit the fine of Rs.30,000/- within one month from the receipt of the copy of this judgment in the lower court, then he will undergo the sentence as awarded by trial court. Let the lower court record be remitted back to the trial court for compliance. (Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.) JKJ 11.08.2011