JUDGMENT : Pankaj Bhandari, J. Both these appeals arise out of order dated 09.09.1992 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bali. 2. In appeal No.340/1992 arising out of the impugned order passed in Sessions Case No.2/1991, the appellant has been convicted under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act and in appeal No.339/1992 arising out of the impugned order passed in Sessions Case No.3/1991, the appellant has been convicted under Section 326 IPC. 3. The contention of the counsel for the appellant is that the parties have entered into a compromise. The offence pertains to the year 1990. Therefore, though the offence under Section 326 IPC is not compoundable, the appellant be released on the sentence already undergone by him. 4. Counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on Jetha Ram & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan, (2006) 9 SCC 255 and Mukesh Kumar & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan, (2013) 11 SCC 511 . 5. I have considered the plea put forth by the counsel for the appellant. 6. Taking note of the fact that the offence pertains to the year 1990 and the parties have entered into a compromise and also the fact that the appellant has remained in confinement for 122 days, and also taking note of the judgment in the case of Jetha Ram & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan (supra), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court, in an offence under Section 326 IPC, directed the accused to be released on the sentence already undergone, as the accused in that case had remained in custody for a period of about five months, this Court, in the present case, while upholding the order of conviction in both these appeals, deem it proper to reduce the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the present appellant to the period already undergone by him. 7. Both the appeals are accordingly disposed off.