IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.421 of 2010 VIJAY KUMAR CHOUBEY S/O LATE GAYA PD. CHOUBEY, R/O VILL.- PATNA, P.S. BELAON (BHAGWANPUR), DIST. KAIMUR AT BHABUA. --- PETITIONER Versus STATE OF BIHAR . ---OPP.PARTY For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikramdeo Singh, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Asha Devi, APP. ----------- 05. 29.06.2010 Heard both sides. Rule confined to the question of sentence only. Learned A.P.P. waives notice on behalf of the State. By order dated 25.03.2010, lower court records were called for which have been received. With the consent of the parties, the present revision application is being disposed of at this stage itself. Petitioner was prosecuted under diverse Sections of the Arms Act with an allegation that the informant, on getting confidential information, raided and searched the house of the petitioner wherefrom one single barrel gun, and 03 live cartridges were recovered. At the trial 07 prosecution witnesses were examined in order to support the allegation/charge. Few documents were also exhibited in the case in order to demonstrate the seizure of the arms and ammunitions and sanction accorded in the case. On a consideration of the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution, the learned trial Court found and held that the prosecution has been able to prove their case beyond all 2 reasonable doubts and accordingly the petitioner was convicted under Sections 25(1-B)A and 26 of the Arms Act and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for 03 years under each head besides imposition of fine with default clause. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order of conviction the petitioner preferred appeal being Criminal Appeal no. 15 of 2009/ 24 of 2009. The learned lower appellate Court, on reappraisal of the evidence available on record, found that there was no illegality and/or infirmity in the judgment and order of conviction recorded by the learned trial Court, and accordingly the conviction and sentences so awarded was maintained. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a middle age person. Learned Court below has assessed his age to be 48 years at the time of conviction. Referring to the trial Court’s judgment, it is submitted that there is/was no criminal antecedent against the petitioner. It appears from the record that the petitioner had to fight the present litigation for nearly three years. It further appears that learned trial Court has convicted and sentenced the petitioner to maximum punishment provided under Section 26 of the Arms Act. Taking the age of the petitioner and his clean antecedent into consideration, this Court is satisfied that a lenient view, so far as the sentences imposed upon him, shall sub serve the ends of justice. The petitioner herein is, thus, sentenced to undergo R.I. for 02 years under both the Sections under which he has been 3 found and held guilty. Other conditions/parts of the sentence(s) recorded by the learned trial Court and affirmed by the learned lower Court remain unaltered. With this modification in sentences, the application is dismissed. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)