JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. In this revision petition filed under Sections 497/401, Cr.P.C., the petitioner is challenging judgment dated 08.08.2008 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar (District Sriganganagar) in Criminal Appeal No.16/2005 by which the appellate Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment dated 11.03.2005 passed by Judl. Magistrate (First Class), Srivijaynagar in Criminal Original Case No.54/2000, in which, the Magistrate convicted the petitioner for committing offence under Section 19/54, Rajasthan Excise Act and passed sentence against him for a term of 4 months' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/- and, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment. 3. As per facts of the case, the police recovered illicit liquor from the petitioner when he was selling liquor at nearby area of Rohi 38 GB and, after usual investigation, challan was filed against the petitioner under Section 19/54, Excise Act before the trial Court, in which, it is alleged that 184 pouch of country made liquor was recovered from the petitioner for which he was not possessing any licence. At the trial, the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, the trial Court convicted the petitioner for offence under Section 54, Rajasthan Excise Act and passed order of sentence of 4 months' R.I. against the petitioner along with fine of Rs. 500/-. Said judgment/order was delivered on 11.03.2005 and after passing the said judgment, in appeal, the appellate Court while accepting the finding of the trial Court dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner. 4. At the threshold, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that sentence awarded by the appellate Court on 08.08.2008 was suspended vide order dated 03.09.2008 and before that the petitioner remained in custody for some time in the year 1999 when the case was registered against him. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the petitioner's sentence may be reduced from 4 months' R.I. to the period of imprisonment already undergone by the petitioner because the petitioner is facing litigation since 1999. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that after registration of this case no fresh case was registered against the petitioner, therefore, in the circumstances, the petitioner was entitled to be benefit under Probation of Offenders Act but learned trial Court did not grant the petitioner benefit of probation. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that after registration of this case no fresh case was registered against the petitioner, therefore, in the circumstances, the petitioner was entitled to be benefit under Probation of Offenders Act but learned trial Court did not grant the petitioner benefit of probation. Therefore, it is prayed by learned counsel for the petitioner that the sentence awarded to the petitioner by the trial Court may be reduced the period of imprisonment already undergone by the petitioner. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor, I have perused both the judgments impugned. 7. Admittedly, FIR was registered against the petitioner on 25.06.1999 and petitioner was enlarged on bail on 02.07.1999; meaning thereby, he remained in custody for seven days in connection with recovery of 184 pouch of country made liquor. Thereafter, he remained in judicial custody from 11.07.2008 to 08.08.2008 during pendency of appeal. When appeal of the petitioner was dismissed on 08.07.2008 he remained in judicial custody till he was released as per order of this Court dated 03.09.2008 on 05.09.2008. 8. In my opinion, the petitioner has remained in custody for near about one and a half months and he is facing trauma of litigation since 25.06.1999. In the circumstances of the case, therefore, I deem it just and proper to reduce the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner from 4 months' R.I. to period of imprisonment already undergone by the petitioner while maintaining the conviction of the petitioner for the offence charged against him. 9. This revision petition is accordingly partly allowed. It is ordered that sentence of imprisonment passed by the trial Court and upheld by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar in Criminal Appeal No.16/2005 vide judgment dated 08.08.2008 is reduced from 4 months' R.I. to the period of imprisonment already undergone by the petitioner. The petitioner shall, however, deposit the amount of fine within a period of two months. The sentence of the petitioner is already suspended by this Court on 03.09.2008, therefore, the bail bonds shall remain in force till deposit of amount of fine by the petitioner in the trial Court. Thereafter, the bail bonds shall stand discharged provided amount of fine is deposited as above within two months, failing which, the trial Court shall proceed in accordance with law.Revision Party allowed. *******