JUDGMENT 1. - This revision is directed against the appellate-judgment dated 8.10.98 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1, Sri Ganganagar whereby he upheld the conviction of the petitioner under section 25(1-B)(a) of the Arms Act and sentence of one year R.l. and a fine of Rs. 100/-. 2. It is not necessary to state the facts of the case in detail as Mr. Bhadu frankly concedes that the prosecution has successfully brought home the guilt of the accused. His only submission is that it is the first offence of the petitioner and looking to his age, his sentence of imprisonment may be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 3. The short facts of the case are that on 24.4.91 Baldeo Singh, A.S.I. accosted the petitioner. On his personal search a revolver was found in his possession. The same was seized. The police submitted a challan against the petitioner. A charge under section 25(1-B)(a) of the Arms Act was framed against the petitioner. He pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined PW 1 Hetram, PW 2 Abdul Aziz, PW 3 Bastiram, PW 4 Tarsemram, PW 5 Kumbh Singh, PW 6 Baldeo Singh and PW 7 Dalu Ram. Accused in his statement under section 313 Cr.P.C. denied accusation. The learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar held the charge proved and therefore he convicted and sentenced him as stated above. 4. I have gone through the evidence produced in the case. By the testimony of PW 6 Baldeo Singh it is amply proved that on personal search of the petitioner a revolver was found in his possession for which he did not have the licence. The Motbirs also corroborate the testimony of Baldeo Singh. Therefore, it cannot be said that the trial court has erred in convicting the petitioner under section 25 of the Arms Act. 5. Coming to the sentence, it is noticed that occurrence had taken place about 8 years ago. The trial took place for more than 6 years. Taking all the facts and circumstances into consideration I deem it proper to reduce the sentence of imprisonment to the period already undergone by the petitioner. 6. Consequently, the revision petition is partly allowed. While maintaining the conviction of the petitioner under section 25 of the Arms Act, the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone by him. 6. Consequently, the revision petition is partly allowed. While maintaining the conviction of the petitioner under section 25 of the Arms Act, the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone by him. The sentence of fine shall stand. If the amount of fine is already deposited, the petitioner be released forthwith if not required in any otherRevision Partly Allowed. *******