JUDGMENT : This is an appeal under Section 374 of the Cr.P.C. against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 04.10.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, North Tripura District, Kamalpur in case No. Sessions Trial 14(NT/KMP) of 2012 whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted under Section 493 of the IPC and thereby sentenced him to suffer R.I. for 8 (eight) years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- only, and in default to pay the fine money, to suffer S.I. for a period of 4(four) months and also convicted under Section 419 of IPC and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for 2(two) years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- only, and in default to pay the fine money, to suffer S.I. for 2(two) months. The sentences would run concurrently. 2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on 21.10.2011, the complainant Smt. Shefali Pal lodged a written complaint to the Officer-in-Charge of Kamalpur Police Station alleging that on 02.08.2011 accused Amarjit Malakar brought her daughter to Halahali by contacting with her over mobile. Thereafter, the accused-appellant had taken her daughter to Dharmanagar Kali Mandir on 04.08.2011 and got her married there. After 2/3 days, they came to the house of the accused and lived together as husband and wife for 4/5 days. The accused went to Kailashahar and made joint declaration with her daughter on 08.09.2011 before the Notary Public disclosing the name in the said declaration as Rahul Chowdhury, thereafter, the accused went out with her daughter elsewhere and in the meantime, the complainant came to know that the accused alone came back to his house, so on 10.10.2011, the complainant came to his house to enquire the whereabouts of her daughter but the accused had given no reply rather drove out her. The complainant also stated that she came to know that the accused earlier got married with daughter of one Sri Sriram Malakar and residing with her in the house of his father-in-law. Since the complainant could not trace out her daughter, she lodged a written complaint against the accused-appellant herein. Accordingly, a case was registered as Kamalpur P.S. Case No. 137 of 2011, under Sections 368 and 419 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. After having investigation, the charge was framed and accordingly the case was put to trial. As many as 16 witnesses were examined and cross-examined. 4. Accordingly, a case was registered as Kamalpur P.S. Case No. 137 of 2011, under Sections 368 and 419 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. After having investigation, the charge was framed and accordingly the case was put to trial. As many as 16 witnesses were examined and cross-examined. 4. The learned Sessions Judge after hearing the parties found the accused guilty of committing offence punishable under Section 493 of the IPC and thereby sentenced him to suffer R.I. for 8 (eight) years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- only, and in default to pay the fine money, to suffer S.I. for a period of 4(four) months and also convicted the appellant under Section 419 of IPC and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for 2(two) years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- only, and in default to pay the fine money, to suffer S.I. for 2(two) months. The sentences would run concurrently. 5. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel Mr. R. Datta appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that the accused-appellant has already suffered imprisonment for more than 7(seven) years and there is no complain against him during the period of his sentence in jail and he has prayed for setting off the period of imprisonment and sentence he already suffered. 6. Mr. A. Roy Barman, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor in his all fairness has conceded the submission of learned counsel of accused-appellant. He also submitted that till date there is no complain and disobedience of jail code against the accused-appellant and as such, his total period of sentence i.e. 8(eight) years may be reduced to the period that he has already suffered in jail before or after the trial. 7. I find force in the submission of learned counsels of the parties and accordingly, I reduce the sentence of the accused-appellant from 8 years to the period he has already been suffered in jail as well as his period of imprisonment which he suffered during the course of investigation and during the course of trial, if any i.e. for more than 7(seven) years. Accordingly, the said period of imprisonment and sentence is hereby set off and the appellant be set at liberty henceforth. 8. Registry is directed to issue release order to the appropriate authority to set the accused-appellant at liberty. Accordingly, the said period of imprisonment and sentence is hereby set off and the appellant be set at liberty henceforth. 8. Registry is directed to issue release order to the appropriate authority to set the accused-appellant at liberty. The accused-appellant be released forthwith, if not wanted in connection with any other case. 9. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the appeal stands disposed of.