IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.283 of 2010 ARUN KUMAR RAJAK S/O SRI MANI RAJAK R/O VILL. MANGARH DHARAHARA, P.S. DHARAHARA, DIST. MUNGER. --- PETITIONER Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR . --- OPP. PARTY. with CR. REV. No.284 of 2010 BIJAY PODDAR . S/O VIDYA PRASAD R/O VILL. MOHANPUR, JAMALPUR, P.S. JAMALPUR, DIST. MUNGER. --PETITIONER Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR . --OPP.PARTY. For the Petitioners : Mr. Krishna Mohan, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, Advocate. ----------- 06 11.08.2010 Heard both sides. Rule confined to question of sentence only. Learned A.P.P. waives notice on behalf of the State. With the consent of the parties the present revision applications are being disposed of at this stage itself. Both the applications arise out of the same judgment and order of conviction dated 28.10.2009, passed by learned lower appellate Court (Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no.II), Bhagalpur, in Cr. Appeal no. 26 of 1999. Petitioner Arun Kumar Rajak (in Cr. Rev. no. 283 of 2010) was apprehended on 28.12.1992, with an iron rod/article which was found Railways property. On his confession, certain articles belonging to the Railways were recovered from the house of petitioner Bijay Poddar (in Cr. Revision no. 284 of 2010). They were, thus, 2 proceeded against. Charge sheet was submitted leading to trial vide R. P.S. case no. 111 of 1992/ Tr. No. 92 of 1999 in the Court of learned Railway Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur. On a consideration of the materials brought on record by the prosecution they were found to have committed offence punishable under Section 3(A) R.P. (U.P.) Act, and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 01 years. Their appeal failed. Hence the present application. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that records bear to the fact that they have been prosecuting/ fighting the present litigation since 1992. Trial consumed close to 07 years. Their appeal remained pending for about 10 years. For all these years they were made to fight the criminal litigation and thereby undergo the rigors of trial which in itself is a shade of punishment. Learned lower appellate Court has not considered this aspect of the matter particularly when the trial Court has not found and recorded that the petitioners were earlier proceeded against and convicted for any criminal offence whatsoever. Different orders passed on these proceedings support the contention of the petitioners that they were allowed to continue in jail custody for sometime enabling this Court to pass appropriate orders with regard to their sentence. It is submitted that petitioner, namely, Arun Kumar Rajak has remained in custody for close to 08 months whereas petitioner, namely, Bijay Poddar has put in more than 06 months of jail custody. It is thus submitted that the petitioners deserve a lesser punishment in the particular facts and 3 circumstances of the case. Learned A.P.P., concedes to the aforesaid submission made on behalf of the petitioners that small quantity of articles belonging to Railway was/were recovered from their possession. After going through the order of the learned trial Court he also concedes that there is no past conviction recorded against the petitioners. On a consideration of the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and after going through the materials placed on record, including the two judgments, this Court is satisfied that petitioners deserve a lesser punishment. They seem to have been remained in custody for 08 months and over 06 months respectively. In the circumstances, the sentence(s) imposed upon them under Section 3(A) R.P. (U.P.) of the Act is reduced to the period already undergone by them. They are directed to be set on liberty if not required in any other case. With this modification in sentence only, both the applications are dismissed. Office is directed to transmit a copy of this order along with the lower Courts record to the Court below immediately. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)