IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.864 of 2011 Kamlesh Prasad Singh, son of Ram Ekbal Singh, resident of village- Dhangare, P.S.-Parsauni, District- Sitamarhi. Versus The State Of Bihar . ----------- 3. 26.07.2011 The accused petitioner has preferred this revision application against the order dated 11.03.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.IV, Sitamarhi in Cr. Appeal No.19/2002/32/2003 by which the judgment/order of conviction and sentence dated 19.04.2002 passed by the learned trial court has been confirmed. With consent of both the parties, this application is disposed of at the time of admission itself. Necessary facts for the disposal of this revision application is that the informant Satyendra Narain Singh, the then Block Development Officer lodged an F.I.R. alleging therein that under Jawahar Rojgar Yojna No.29/90-91 under Madanpur Panchayat was for repairing of hostel of Dhangar School at the estimated cost of Rs.75,800/- and the accused petitioner was appointed as Agent by the then Mukhiya. Rs.15,000/- was advanced to the petitioner. Junior Engineer made the estimate of the work done by the petitioner and after measurement informed that the work was done at the estimated cost of Rs.10,568/- and thus, Rs.443/-remained with the 2 petitioner. Thus, the petitioner has misappropriated the government money of Rs.4432/- of the Jawahar Rojgar Yojna. After investigation of Parsauni P.S. Case No.16/1994 , charge- sheet was submitted against the petitioner and the co-accused. After the trial, the petitioner was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 406 of the I.P.C. and he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months vide order dated 19.04.2002 passed by the learned trial court. Thereafter the petitioner filed Cr. Appeal No.19/02, which has been dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.VI, Sitamarhi and the impugned order of conviction and sentence has been upheld. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has already been in custody for more than two and half months and the petitioner has already suffered mental agony since the year 1994 and more than 17 years have passed, therefore, the sentence of the petitioner may be reduced to the period already gone under custody. Learned counsel for the State could not controvert the contention of the petitioner. Considering the facts and circumstances, it appears that the petitioner has been convicted and sentenced to simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under 3 Section 406 of the I.P.C. The case was instituted in the year 1994 and since then, the petitioner has been suffering from mental agony and he has been already in custody for more than two and half months and the petitioner is still in custody. The prayer of the petitioner appears to be genuine. Considering the facts and circumstances mentioned above, in my opinion, 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 is dismissed. Let this order be communicated to the learned trial court through fax at the cost of the petitioner. V.K. Pandey ( Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)