IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1324 of 2008 MD.DHULU SHEKH S/O TENU SHEKH --- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. MD. PANU SHEKH --- OPP. PARTIES. For the petitioner : Mr. Najmul Hoda, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Ramchandra Singh, APP ----------- 05 11.03.2011 Rule confined to question of sentence only. Learned APP waives notice on behalf of the State. With the consent of the parties the present revision application is being finally disposed of at this stage itself. Sole petitioner is aggrieved by judgment and order dated 18.07.2008 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kishanganj in Cr. Appeal no. 30 of 2002 whereby appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed with modification in sentence. For an occurrence that had taken place on 16.03.1993, the petitioner was put on trial vide Tr. No. 671 of 2002 for the charge punishable under Section 392 of the Penal Code. In order to prove the charge prosecution examined as many as 07 witnesses besides exhibiting documents. On a consideration of the materials on record, trial Court held that charges have been proved beyond shadow of all reasonable doubts. Accordingly the petitioner was held guilty under Section 392 of the Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 03 years. Aggrieved over the said judgment and order of conviction, petitioner preferred 2 appeal which stood dismissed with modification in sentence. The lower appellate Court reduced the sentence to R.I. for 02 years. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial in the present case consumed more than 09 years. Fighting criminal litigation for a long time is a shade of punishment as during these periods the litigant had to undergo several excruciating circumstances which definitely tells upon his mental, physical and economical condition. It is submitted that at the time of recording conviction he was found aged about 56 years. Now, according to the learned counsel, petitioner is more than 65 years of age. It is submitted that considering the fact that he had remained in custody for over 19 months he was released on bail by this Court under order dated 05.12.2008. A positive stand has been taken by learned counsel that petitioner has already completed 19 months of jail custody and if remission is granted then he would be completing about 24 months of jail custody. Lower Court Records have already been received. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State on perusal of the order sheet of the Court below is not in a position to dispute the aforesaid stand of the petitioner. Taking all these facts and circumstances into consideration, this Court is satisfied that in the facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner deserves to be sentenced for the proven charge for the period already undergone by him. 3 Accordingly, the sentence awarded under Section 392 of the Penal Code is reduced to the period already undergone by the petitioner. Petitioner is discharged from the liabilities of his bail bond(s). Application is dismissed with modification in sentence. Sym/ ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)