CRIMINAL REVISION No.316 of 2001 ……………… Against the judgment dated 21-4-2001 passed by the Ist Additional Sessions Judge,Darbhanga in Criminal Appeal No.85/1999. ………………… SHAMBHU NATH PANDEY,son of late Kailash Pandey resident of village and P.O.-Madhopatti, P.S.- Kamtaul,Dist.-Darbhanga. .. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Ajay Kumar Jalan,son of late Ramaballab Jalan,resident of village-Bara-Bazar,P.S.- Town,Dist.-Darbhanga. .. Opp.Parties …………………… For the Petitioner : Mr. Prakash Chandra Gupta, Advocate. For the State : N o n e …………………… P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANDHATA SINGH Mandhata Singh,J.:-This revision application has been filed against the judgment dated 21st April, 2001 passed by the Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Darbhanga in Criminal Appeal No.85 of 1999 confirming the judgment of conviction with certain modification in sentence dated 12.8.1999 passed in G.R.No.1342 of 1994/T.R.No.105 of 1999 by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Darbhanga. It is a case in which petitioner has been alleged for impersonating some one. In reality, land of a temple was being transferred by execution of sale deed in which only forgery as alleged was committed. Pujari of the temple was 2 Laxaman Das and deed was to be executed in favour of the petitioner’s wife. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there are several discrepancies sufficient to be taken as ground to allow the revision petition and set aside the judgment and order passed by both the courts but he centralizes himself on the point of sentence and on this point his submission as per allegation is that if any attempt was made to get executed a piece of land of temple in favour of his wife resulted in failure as he was caught at the stage of its registration and petitioner remained in custody since 17-07-2002 to 12-11-2002 at the initial stage while for more than one month when trial conducted. So that can be taken sufficient towards sentence. This much of the submission of the learned counsel is accepted appearing meeting the justice end. Accordingly, sentence is modified to the period undergone. He is exempted from fine also. With such modification this revision application is dismissed. ( Mandhata Singh, J.) Patna High Court,Patna Dated the 30th October,2009 A.H./N.A.F.R.