JUDGMENT 1. - These revision petitions have been preferred against the judgment dated 4.4.95 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore, whereby he dismissed the appeal filed by petitioner-Bagaram and confirmed his conviction and sentence for the offences under sections. 408, 467, 468, 471 and 120B Indian Penal Code. He however partly allowed the appeal of Poonmaram and acquitted him for the offence under section. 408 Indian Penal Code, but maintained his conviction and sentence for the offences under Sections 467, 468, 471 & 120B Indian Penal Code recorded by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalore by his judgment dated 23.6.1986. The petitioners have been sentenced for these offences in the manner enumerated below:- Name Offence under Section Sentence and Fine Bagaram 408 Indian Penal Code S.I. for one year and fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default of two months' S.I. Bagaram Poonmaram 467 Indian Penal Code S.I. for two years and fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of S.I. for six months. Bagaram Poonmaram 468 Indian Penal Code S.I. for one year. Bagaram Poonmaram 471 Indian Penal Code S.I. for one year. Bagaram Poonmaram 120B Indian Penal Code S.I. for one year. It was also ordered that the substantive sentences shall run concurrently. 2. Since these revision petitions arise out of common judgments passed by the lower Courts, those are being decided by this common order. 3. I have heard Mr. P.N. Mohnani and Mr. Pradeep Shah learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri K.L. Thakur Public Prosecutor at length and carefully perused the record of the lower Courts. I have also gone through the evidence recorded in this case, including the statements of PW 2 Navaram, PW 4 Trilokiram, PW 5 Bhimaram and PW 12 Kaluchand. In my considered opinion, the learned lower Courts have correctly scanned, discussed and evaluated the evidence in right perspective and have not committed any illegality in holding the accused-petitioners guilty for the offences under sections. 467, 468, 47l and 120B Indian Penal Code. From the evidence recorded in this case, offence under Section 408 Indian Penal Code has also been successfully brought home beyond reasonable doubt against petitioner-Bagaram, who was the Manager of the Ummedabad Sahkari Seva Simiti, Ummedabad. The concurrent findings of the lower Courts in this regard are based on record and not perverse and those do not warrant any interference. 4. The concurrent findings of the lower Courts in this regard are based on record and not perverse and those do not warrant any interference. 4. However there are mitigating circumstances in this case. The incident occurred on 24.7.1975. The loan of amount of Rs. 500/-, which was granted in the name of PW 2 Tararam but taken away by the petitioners, has already been deposited long back i.e. on 9.7.1979. Petitioners Bagaram and Poonmaram, who were the Manager and Cashier respectively of the said Simiti, have been facing the investigation, thereafter the trial and prosecuting the appeal in this case since Nov. 1978 i.e. for last seventeen years. During this period, they have undergone mental agony, harassment and financial burden. Therefore, keeping in view the aforementioned mitigating circumstances as also the nature of the offence, committed by the petitioners, I feel that the punishment imposed on them by the lower Courts is excessive. The petitioners are under detention and undergoing sentence since 4.4.95. In my considered opinion, three months simple imprisonment and fine of Rs. 100/- for the offence under section. 408 Indian Penal Code, two months S.I. and fine of Rs. 100/- for offence under section. 467 Indian Penal Code, two months S.I. and fine of Rs. 100 for each of the offences under sections. 468,471 and 120B Indian Penal Code shall suffice to secure the ends of justice in this case. 5. Accordingly, these revision petitions are partly allowed and conviction of petitioner Bagaram for the offence under sections. 408, 467, 468, 471 and 120B Indian Penal Code and conviction of petitioner Poonmaram under sections 467, 468, 471 and 120B Indian Penal Code are maintained. However the sentence of Bagaram for the offence under section. 408 Indian Penal Code is reduced from one year's Simple imprisonment to three months S.I. and his fine of Rs. 1,000/- is reduced to Rs. 100/-. In default of payment of fine he will further undergo S.I. for one month. The substantive sentences of Bagaram and Poonmaram for the offences under sections. 467, 468, 471 and 120B Indian Penal Code are reduced to S.I. for two months on each count and the fines imposed on them are also reduced to Rs. one hundred in default to further undergo S.I. for one month on each count. All the substantive sentences shall run concurrently. 6. 467, 468, 471 and 120B Indian Penal Code are reduced to S.I. for two months on each count and the fines imposed on them are also reduced to Rs. one hundred in default to further undergo S.I. for one month on each count. All the substantive sentences shall run concurrently. 6. The Superintendent Central Jail, Jodhpur where the petitioners are at present lodged, be informed accordingly. The record of the lower Courts be also sent back.Revision partly accepted. *******