IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.883 of 2011 Bihari Yadav @ Bihar Yadav son of Gulli Yadav, resident of village- Pasraha Jhitti, P.S.- Khaira, District- Jamui. … Petitioner. Versus The State Of Bihar … Opp. Party. ------- For the petitioner :Mr.Prakash Mahto, Adv. For the State : Mrs. Pronoti Singh, APP ----------- 3. 22.11.2011 This application has been placed for consideration of bail matter of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that lower court records have been received as such this revision application itself should be disposed of at this stage. Learned counsel for the State has got no objection. The accused- petitioner has preferred this revision application against the judgment and order dated 31st March 2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-II, Jamui in Cr. Appeal No. 22 of 2007 by which the order of conviction and sentence dated 28.4.2007 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamui in G. R. No. 1128 of 2006, Trial No. 2247 of 2007 has been confirmed and the appeal has been dismissed. The prosecution case, in brief, is 2 that Ram Vijay Sharma, Officer-in-Charge of Khaira Police Station had gone to village Pasaraha- Jhitta to arrest the accused of Khaira P. S. Case No. 15 of 1992 under Section 396 I.P.C., namely, Bihari Yadav (petitioner). He was also wanted in Khaira P. S. Case No. 36 of 2006 and 106 of 2006 under Section 364 A/ 34 I.P.C.. The raiding party surrounded the house of the petitioner. One person was seen to be fleeing from the house and he was arrested with the help of the police who disclosed his name Bihari Yadav @ Bihar Yadav son of Gulli Yadav, village Pasaraha- Jhitti and from his possession a regular single barrel stolen gun and three live cartridges of 12 bore were recovered. On the fard beyan of aforesaid Officer-in-Charge Khaira P. S. Case No. 136 of 2006 was instituted under Section 414 I.P.C. and 25(1-B) a and 26 of the Arms Act was instituted. After investigation charge-sheet was submitted under those sections. After trial the petitioner was held guilty and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and six months under Section 25(1-B)a of the Arms Act and a fine of Rs.2000/- and in case of 3 default of payment of fine three months simple imprisonment and further convicted and sentenced for two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2000/- under Section 26 of the Arms Act and in case of default in payment of fine three months simple imprisonment and both the sentences to run concurrently vide order dated 28.4.2007. Against this order the petitioner preferred Cr. Appeal No. 22 of 2007 which has been dismissed and judgment and order passed by the learned trial court has been confirmed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a poor man and he has been in custody from 31.8.2006 to 15.5.2007 during trial and after dismissal of the appeal he has been in custody since 21.6.2011. The petitioner has remained in custody for 13 months. The petitioner has minor children who are dependant on him. The sentence of the petitioner should be modified. Learned counsel for the State could not controvert the contention of the petitioner while opposing his prayer. After hearing learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the record, 4 it appears that the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is correct. The petitioner has remained in custody for more than one year and the petitioner has minor children who are dependant on him. Considering the facts and circumstances, in my opinion, it is a fit case in which the sentence can be modified. Accordingly, the sentence of the petitioner is reduced to the period already undergone in custody and a fine of Rs.2000/-. The petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.2000/- in the Nazarat Civil Court, Jamui and file a receipt thereof in the learned trial court in G.R. No. 1128 of 2006, Trial No. 2247 of 2007. Thereafter, the petitioner will be released, if not wanted in any other case. In the result, this application is dismissed with the modification in the sentence to the aforesaid extent. Kanchan (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)