JUDGMENT Mr. Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. – Heard the parties. 2. This application is directed against the judgment dated 3rd June, 2000, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Palamau at Daltonganj in Cr. Appeal No. 13/78 of 1998, whereby and where under the appeal preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.6.98 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Garhwa in C.F. Case No. 8/85 (Trial No. 14/98) convicting the petitioners for the offence under section 33 of the Indian Forest Act and sentencing them to imprisonment for three months along with fine of Rs.500/-, has been dismissed. 3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the Katha allegedly seized was actually purchased by the petitioners, for which he has referred to Ext-A. It has further been submitted that the defence witness examined on behalf of the petitioners has proved the receipt of Garhwa Bazar Samiti with respect to purchase of Katha and such fact has not been properly considered either by the learned trial court or by the appellate court while convicting and sentencing the petitioners for the offence under section 33 of the Indian Forest Act. 4. Mr. Shekhar Sinha, learned A.P.P., has opposed the prayer and supported the impugned order. 5. It appears that on the allegation that on 6.2.1985, the petitioners and others were arrested along with 329 Kg. Katha packed in five gunny bags, C.F. Case No. 8/85 was instituted. After enquiry, prosecution report was submitted and case was transferred to the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Garhwa, who after trial convicted the petitioners for the offence under section 33 of the Indian Forest Act and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for three months each. Against the order of conviction and sentence, petitioners had preferred an appeal being Cr. Appeal No. 13/78 of 1998, which however was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Palamau by judgment dated 3rd June, 2000. It further appears that the main plank of argument of learned counsel for the petitioners is with respect to a receipt, which was marked as Ext-A, which shows purchase of Katha for Rs.10,050/- and which was approved by D.W-1-Pradeep Sao. Learned trial court as well as learned appellate court have discussed the fact that neither in Ext-A, name of seller has been mentioned nor licence has been mentioned. Learned trial court as well as learned appellate court have discussed the fact that neither in Ext-A, name of seller has been mentioned nor licence has been mentioned. It also appears that neither the seller nor any other authority of Garhwa Bazar Samiti had been examined to prove the genuineness of Ext-A. It also appears that P.W-8- Bhupendra Prasad Sinha, who was Forester at the relevant point of time, had found 110 Khunta of Khair tree in the protected forest which goes to show that Katha were prepared by cutting Khair tree from the protected forest. There is sufficient evidence on record to suggest the complicity of the petitioners in illegally carrying 329 Kg. of Katha, which was seized by the Forest Officials. No illegality could be detected by the learned courts below in convicting and sentencing the petitioners for the offence under section 33 of the Indian Forest Act. This application fails so far as the challenge which has been made to the judgment of conviction is concerned. 6. However, it has been submitted that out of sentence of 3 months, petitioners have remained in custody for a period of 15 days. Taking into consideration the fact that Forest case was instituted in the year 1985 and more than thirty years have passed since the institution of the Forest Case and since the petitioners have also suffered rigors of the prosecution case for more than three decades, the sentence passed by the learned trial court and affirmed by the learned appellate court is modified to the period undergone. 7. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed with the aforesaid modification in sentence.