JUDGMENT 1. - This revision petition has been filed by the accused petitioner from Jail against the judgment dated 23.5.2003 passed by the learned Special Judge, ST/ST (Prevention of Atrocities), Udaipur, in Criminal Appeal No. 11/2001 by which he dismissed the appeal filed by the accused petitioner and confirmed the judgment and order dated 21.3.2001 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Udaipur in Criminal Regular Case No. 1197/2000 by which the learned Magistrate convicted the accused petitioner for offence under Section 411 I.RC. and sentenced him to 1 year's R.l. 2. Since this revision petition was preferred by the accused petitioner from jail and nobody was appearing on behalf of the accused petitioner, therefore, this Court by its order dated 13.10.2003 appointed Shri K.R. Bhati as amicus curiae in this case. 3. In this revision petition the learned counsel for the accused petitioner has not challenged the findings of conviction for offence under Section 411 I.RC. recorded against the accused petitioner by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Udaipur through judgment dated 21.3.2001 and confirmed in appeal by the Special Judge, SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities), Udaipur through judgment dated 23.5.2003 but it has been argued on behalf of the accused petitioner that looking to the fact that accused petitioner is in jail for near about 6 months and looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, it would be just and proper to reduce the sentence of accused petitioner to the period already undergone by him. 4. I have heard both and gone through the record of the case. 5. Since the findings of conviction for offence under Section 411 I.RC. recorded by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Udaipur through judgment dated 21.3.2001 and confirmed in appeal by the learned Special Judge, SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities), Udaipur through judgment dated 23.5.2003 have not been challenged in this revision petition, therefore, this revision petition against conviction of the accused petitioner for offence under Section 411 I.RC. is liable to be dismissed. 6. is liable to be dismissed. 6. However, on point of sentence looking to the fact that accused petitioner is in jail for near about 6 months and looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the present case, ends of justice would be met if the accused petitioner is sentenced to the period already undergone by him for offence under Section 411 I.RC. 7. Accordingly, this revision petition is partly allowed in the following manner: The revision petition filed by the accused petitioner Kalu against his conviction is dismissed and his conviction for offence under Section 411 I.RC. recorded by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Udaipur through judgment dated 21.3.2001 and confirmed in appeal by the learned Special Judge, SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities), Udaipur through judgment dated 23.5.2003 is maintained. However the sentence awarded to the accused petitioner by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Udaipur through order dated 21.3.2001 and confirmed in appeal by the learned Special Judge, SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities), Udaipur through judgment dated 23.5.2003 for offence under Section 411 I.RC. is reduced to the period already undergone by him. However, the order of fine dated 21.3.2001 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Udaipur and confirmed in appeal by the learned Special Judge, SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Udaipur is maintained. Since the accused petitioner Kalu is in Jail, he be released forthwith if not wanted in any other case. Revision partly allowed. *******