JUDGMENT 1. - This revision petition has been listed today on the application of petitioner Bheriya under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code for suspension of sentence. However, at the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the revision petition itself was being heard finally and disposed of at this stage. 2. This revision petition was filed against the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Udaipur dated 6.10.2006 in Criminal Appeal No. 27/2006, by which while partly allowing the appeal, affirmed the conviction recorded against the petitioners by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanore, District Udaipur in regular Criminal Case No. 31/2005 and were sentenced as under: Under Section 457 Indian Penal Code. : R.I. for 2 years and a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo S.I. for two months. Under Section 380 Indian Penal Code. : R.I. for 2 years and a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo S.I. for two months. 3. The charge against the accused-petitioners was that they committed lurking house trespass in the house of Ambalal and committed theft of silver ornaments. The report of the incident was lodged on 7.10.2002 by Smt. Kala (PW-5). Upon this report, a case was registered by the police and the accused-petitioners were arrested and on their information, the said theft articles were recovered and a charge-sheet was filed against them. The prosecution examined 10 witnesses and statements of the accused-petitioners were also recorded under Section 313 Criminal Procedure Code and they were convicted and sentenced as above. 4. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners does not want to argue the case on merits and his submissions are that the matter is very old, the theft articles are of very small value, the accused-petitioners are triables and they have undergone the sentence for more than a period of one year and the ends of justice will be met, if the accused-petitioners are sentenced to the period already undergone. 5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has supported the judgments of the Courts below. 6. Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, it seems that ends of justice will be met, if the accused-petitioners are sentenced to the period already undergone. 7. Consequently, this revision petition is partly allowed. 6. Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, it seems that ends of justice will be met, if the accused-petitioners are sentenced to the period already undergone. 7. Consequently, this revision petition is partly allowed. While maintaining the conviction of the accused-petitioners viz. (1) Bheriya @ Bheru Lal, (2) Nathu and (3) Prabhu Nath under Sections 457 and 380 Indian Penal Code. recorded by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanore, District Udaipur vide his judgment dated 4.8.2006 and affirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Udaipur vide his judgment dated 6.10.2006, they are sentenced to the period already undergone. However, the sentence of fine is maintained.Accused-petitioner Bheriya @ Bheru Lal is in jail, he be released forthwith, if not required in any other case, on depositing of fine, else he will undergo the sentence in default of payment of fine. Rest of the accused-petitioners are on bail, they need not to surrender subject to deposition of fine within a period of 30 days from today, else they will undergo the sentence in default of payment of fine upon issuing warrant of arrest by the trial Court.Revision partly allowed. *******