JUDGMENT : Learned counsel for the appellant is unable to challenge the conviction of the appellant recorded under Section 6 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1985 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. His prayer, however, is for reduction of sentence from the minimum period of one year under the proviso to Section 25(1B) of the Arms Act wherein the Court may for any adequate and special reasons to be recorded in the judgment impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term less than one year. 2. The reason which appeals to us is that the trial Court has recorded that the appellant was not involved in any terrorist activity for his record in that respect was clean. Additionally, we have now to send him to jail because when the Designated Court convicted him, he was released on bail under its order to enable it to file an appeal to this Court. Here, he got extension of bail under orders. Since, we are now sending him back to prison, we feel that in view of the clean record of the appellant, a sentence of six months simple imprisonment would, in the circumstances, meet the ends of justice. The sentence is, thus, reduced accordingly. The appeal partly succeeds to this effect. Ordered accordingly. Order accordingly.