IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.901 of 2008 NAGENDRA PRASAD YADAV @ NAGENDRA YADAV Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 3 5.5.2009 Heard. The petitioner has preferred this revision for setting aside the Judgment dated 6.5.2008 passed in Criminal Appeal No.10/2007/125/2007 by Sri Vijay Kumar Jain, Additional Sessions Judge-FTC-III, Gaya, whereby he dismissed the appeal preferred against the Judgment of conviction passed by the trial court. However, as the petitioner had remained in custody for nearly two years, the Appellate court reduced the sentence to period undergone.. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per prosecution case, one sten gun and a pistol was recovered from the house alongwith some cartridges and seizure list was prepared. But seized arms were not put in sealed cover. He has referred to seizure of two pistols and does not mention that any sten gun was seized. He submits that there is discrepancy in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. He states that in fact the Police party had gone to arrest petitioner’s brother Sanjay Yadav. He submits that. Even as per prosecution case, no one was present in the house. He submits that petitioner was not even aware that arms were kept in the premises, which was not fully constructed Finally, he submits that it would appear from evidence of defence witnesses that petitioner lives in village Mahadeo Bigha and not at village Upthu. - 2 - Prosecution witnesses have stated that two fire arms and some cartridges were recovered from the house The deposition of Sergeant Major confirms the seizure list. The prosecution witnesses have deposed that the house fully belongs to petitioner and his brother. Though, P.Ws.3,4 and 5 have become hostile, P.Ws. 1,2,6 and 7 have supported the prosecution case. This Court does not find any gross illegality or error on record to differ with the consistent findings of both the courts below. In view of aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to interfere with the judgments of both the courts below. However, in the facts of the case, the fine imposed on the petitioner is also set aside as he has already remained in jail for sufficient period. As such, this revision application stands dismissed. SKBOSE (Samarendra Pratap Ssingh)