JUDGMENT Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Nobody appears on behalf of the State when the matter is taken up. 2. This revision application is directed against the Appellate Judgment and Order dated 03.09.2002 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, IV, Patna in Cr. Appeal No. 178 of 1993 by which the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna dated 06.09.1993 in Tr. No. 778 of 1993 (Kotwali P.S. Case No. 184/1990, G.R. No. 1704 of 1990) has been affirmed. 3. The petitioners were convicted under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years. 4. Earlier the case was admitted to hearing on the point of sentence only. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the judgment impugned is not in accordance with law and is erroneous since the charge against the petitioners has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt in which the benefit should go to the accused. In the absence of learned A.P.P. for the State, learned counsel for the petitioners has assisted this Court and has taken it through the impugned judgment, the trial Court judgment as well as the lower Court records. 6. Upon going through the same, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the order of conviction. However, keeping in view the period the petitioners have been in custody, this Court is inclined to interfere in the order of sentence. 7. Accordingly, this revision application is disposed off without interfering in the order of conviction while modifying the sentence to the period already undergone in custody. The petitioners stand discharged of the liabilities of their bail bonds and sureties.