JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 10.3.1992 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge Neemkathana in Sessions Case No. 31/1991 whereby the appellant Kishan Singh @ Krishan Singh was convicted under section 436 IPC and sentenced to undergo 3 years RI and fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine further SI of 3 months. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 28.5.1989 complainant Phool Singh lodged a written report at Police Station Neekathana stating that while he was sitting at his residence at 1.30 p.m. Kishan Singh put his hut on fire. He has seen Kishan Singh putting his hut on fire. Due to fire domestic utensils and Rs. 2500 were burnt. Upon this report FIR No. 92/89 was lodged for the offence under section 436 IPC. The trial court framed the charge against the accused appellant and after recording the evidence and hearing both the sides, convicted the accused appellant as mentioned above. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant has stated that in the fire only a meagre amount was involved and the occurrence took place on 28.5.89 and at that time the accused appellant was aged 18 years and now he is aged about 40 years having marriageable children and it is his first offence and either he should be released on probation or he should be released for the period already undergone by him in imprisonment. Mr. Peeyush Kumar, Public Prosecutor opposed the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the appellants. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and considered the facts and circumstances of the case. It is an admitted fact that the accused appellant has remained in judicial custody for ten days. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and particularly the age of the accused appellant, I am of the view that ends of justice would be met in case the accused appellant is sentenced to the period already undergone by him. 5. Consequently, this appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the appellant Kishan Singh @ Krishna Singh under section 436 IPC is maintained, but his sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by him in the confinement. The accused appellant is on bail. The bail bonds stand discharged. He need not to surrender.Appeal partly allowed. *******