JUDGMENT 1. - Heard, By his judgment and order dated 6.8.84, the learned Magistrate held the applicant guilty of offence under sections 3 and 4 of the Rajasthan Gambling Ordinance, 1949 ('the Ordinance'), convicted him as such and sentenced him to simple imprisonment for six and three months respectively. By the same judgment and order, the learned Magistrate had convicted nine others also of offence under section 4 of the Ordinance and sentenced them to fine of Rs. 500/- each. The accusation against the applicant was that he was running and maintaining a gambling house in his hotel Ganga Hotel, Station Circle, Jaipur and the nine others were found gambling there. In appeal, the conviction and sentence as recorded by the learned trial Magistrate were confirmed against all the accused including the applicant. 2. Mr. Jagdeep Dhankhar, the learned Sr. Counsel, appearing for the applicant tried to challenge the order of conviction of the applicant by requiring me to re-appreciate the evidence on record in view of the statement of the applicant u/s.313 Cr.I.C. In the alternative, the learned counsel submitted that the applicant had faced the rigors of the trial of the case for about five years and that he has already undergone about half of the sentence awarded to him. He prayed that in the facts and circumstances of the case, which include the defence versions as given in the statement of the applicant recorded under section 313 Criminal Procedure Code and in which accusations have been leveled against the police officials of exercising coercion and undue influence upon him for entertaining them and their guests free of charges, the sentence already undergone by the applicant should be considered sufficient for him. 3. On examining the material placed before me I am satisfied that on appreciation of the testimony of PW-1 Ummed Singh, PW-2 Ramanand, PW-3 Basant Singh Chouhan, PW-4 Rajkumar, PW-5 Rajender Singh and PW-6 Ramhet, who had stated that the nine other co-accused were caught red-handed in the hotel being run by the applicant, playing game of cards with money, the Courts below were right in holding the applicant guilty of the offence under sections of the Ordinance. Therefore, his conviction for the aforesaid offence is hereby confirmed. 4. Therefore, his conviction for the aforesaid offence is hereby confirmed. 4. For sentence though I do not approve of the act and conduct of the applicant in indulging himself in such anti-social activities yet, looking to his long trial and the period of sentence already undergone by him, I feel inclined to reduce his sentences under the two counts to the period of sentence already undergone by him plus to pay a consolidated fine of Rs. 500/- or in case of default, to undergo S.I. for one month more. I do order accordingly. With this modification in the sentence of the applicant, this application is dismissed.Revision Disposed Of. *******