IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.670 of 2011 Radheyshyam Singh, son of Sri Ram Narayan Singh, resident of village-Ratanpura, P.S.-Kargahar, District- Rohtas. ………Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar . ………..Opposite Party ----------- 4. 17.10.2011 The accused-petitioner has preferred this revision application against the judgment and order dated 17.02.2011 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.III, Rohtas at Sasaran in Cr. Appeal No.34/2004 by which judgment and order dated 8.11.2004 passed in G.R.No.1778/2000, Trial No.563/2004 has been confirmed and the appeal has been dismissed. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant Anita Devi was married to the petitioner Radheshyam Singh in the year 1993 and after Gowna she went to her matrimonial home where the petitioner and others began to demand dowry and for the same they began to torture the informant and lastly she was ousted from the house. The father of the informant brought her in his house but after one month and 15 days again in the 2 case of agreement the petitioner brought the informant in his house. After that the petitioner began to demand colour T.V. Motorcycle and Rs.1 lac from her and the petitioner insulted her and began to say that he would solemnize another marriage and the informant was threatened to be killed. On 10.10.2000 at about 10.00 A.M. the petitioner (husband of the informant) having assaulted for colour T.V., Motorcycle and cash, ousted her from the house. The informant went to the police station and gave her fardbeyan regarding the occurrence. On the basis of fardbeyan of the informant, Kargahar (Sirhi) P.S. Case No.106/2000 for the offence under Section 498 A/34 I.P.C. and ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act was registered against the petitioner and others. After trial, the petitioner was held guilty for the charge under Sections 498A, 323 I.P.C. and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years under Section 498 A of the I.P.C. with a fine of Rs.300/-, simple imprisonment for six months under Section 323 of the I.P.C. and simple imprisonment for one year under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act with fine of Rs.400/- and in case of 3 default of payment of fine the petitioner was directed to undergo S.I. of additional three months.. Against this order, the petitioners preferred Cr. Appeal No.34/2004. In the appeal also, the conviction and sentence of the petitioner have been upheld by the learned Appellate Court, against which this application has been filed. It is submitted that the informant has filed a Divorce Case against the petitioner. Later on with mutual consent, the divorce has been granted and both the parties are living separately and the informant Anita Devi has performed another marriage and she has also been blessed with two children from the new wedlock. He has further submitted that the petitioner has already been in custody for more than seven months and the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel for the State could not controvert the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Considering the facts and circumstances as stated above, I find that there is no material on the record to show that the petitioner has any criminal antecedent. It appears that the occurrence has taken place on 4 10.10.2000. More than 11 years have passed. The petitioner has been suffering from mental agony. In my opinion, there is necessity of modification in the sentence of the petitioner. For the ends of justice, the sentence of the petitioner is reduced to the period already undergone in custody. With the aforesaid modification in the sentence, this application stands disposed of. V.K. Pandey ( Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)