JUDGMENT : G.BASAVARAJA, J. The appellant/accused No.1 has preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 30.12.2024 passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, in SC No.56/2022. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as to their rank as before the trial Court. 3. The brief facts leading to this appeal are that the Circle Inspector of Police, C.E.N. (Cyber, Economic, Narcotics) Police, Tumakuru submitted the charge sheet against accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offence punishable under Sections 66(c) and 66(d) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 471 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Section 14A and 14B of the Foreigners Act, 1946. 4. It is alleged by the prosecution that accused Nos.1 and 2 who are hailing from Uganda and Kenya having common intention, on 31.10.2020 had installed a skimming device — an electronic record to one ATM machine at Bheemasandra, Tumakuru Town and collected the data of consumers who were doing their transactions in the said ATM till 01.11.2020 and further, by utilizing the illegally collected data, had fraudulently made use of data available with respect to ATM card details and its unique identification features belonging to the complainant herein Dr.Tilakaram. Further accused Nos.1 and 2 in order to cheat, had created a false ATM card bearing No.4013752009304893 of bank account No.20092610000973 of Syndicate Bank, Siddhartha Nagara Branch, Tumakuru, belonging to the complainant and on 22.11.2020 had went to ATM booth of Department of Posts, Jalahalli, Bengaluru, made use of the said ATM card and drawn a sum of Rs. 25,000/- in three transactions between 11.12 a.m. and 11.14 a.m. On the same day, in furtherance of their said common intention, they had further used the fake identity card of Srirama College of Commerce as genuine. Apart from the above, both accused being foreign national, had entered into and stayed in India without any valid documents required for such entry. Thus, accused Nos.1 and 2 had committed offences punishable under Section 66(c) and Section 66(d) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, Sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 471 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Sections 14A and 14B of the Foreigners Act, 1946. 5. Thus, accused Nos.1 and 2 had committed offences punishable under Section 66(c) and Section 66(d) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, Sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 471 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Sections 14A and 14B of the Foreigners Act, 1946. 5. After filing the charge sheet, the learned III Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Tumakuru, took cognizance of all the offences and case was registered in CC No.21/2021. The Assistant Public Prosecutor filed application under Section 323 of Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate to commit the case to the Sessions Court. Since the offence under Sections 14, 14A and 14B of the Foreigners Act, 1946 is punishable with minimum imprisonment of 2 years which may extend for 8 years along with fine may be extended to Rs. 50,000/-, the learned Magistrate, vide separate detailed order dated 24.02.2022, had allowed the application under Section 323 of Cr.P.C., thereby holding that as per Schedule-II of Cr.P.C., it lacks jurisdiction to try the case on hand, as the period of imprisonment under the provisions of Section 14A of the Foreigners Act is more than 7 years and by taking recourse under Section 323 of Cr.P.C, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and case was registered in SC No. 56/2022 and accused Nos.1 and 2 are in judicial custody from the date of their arrest i.e., on 07.12.2020. 6. On hearing the arguments of both sides, the trial Court has framed the charges against the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 66 and 66(c) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, Sections 468, 471 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 14A and 14B of the Foreigners Act, 1946. The same was read over and explained to the accused. Having understood the same, accused Nos.1 and 2 pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 7. To prove the case of the prosecution, in all, 27 witnesses were examined as PW1 to PW18 and 66 documents were marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P66 and Ex.C1 to Ex.C5 are also marked. 91 material objects were marked as M.O.1 to M.O.91. On closure of the prosecution side evidence, statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded. Accused have totally denied the statement of prosecution witnesses. However, they have not adduced any defense evidence on their behalf. 8. 91 material objects were marked as M.O.1 to M.O.91. On closure of the prosecution side evidence, statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded. Accused have totally denied the statement of prosecution witnesses. However, they have not adduced any defense evidence on their behalf. 8. Having heard the arguments on both sides, the trial Court has convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 66 and 66(c) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, Sections 14A and 14B of the Foreigners Act, 1946, and Sections 468 and 471 r/w Section 34 of IPC. The trial Court has also passed the sentence for the aforesaid offences. 9. Being aggrieved by this judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the trial Court, the appellant/accused No.1, has preferred this appeal. 10. Sri.Balakrishna.M.R learned counsel for the appellant would submit that though the appellant has preferred the appeal against the conviction and order on sentence, now the appellant is not going to press the order on conviction passed by the trial Court. Further, he would submit that the accused is in judicial custody from the date of arrest i.e., on 07.12.2000 and has already completed nearly 5 years sentence. 11. The accused No.1 was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 5 years and pay a fine of Rs. 2,00,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 r/w Section 34 of IPC and to undergo imprisonment for a period of 3 years and also pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 66(c) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 r/w Section 34 of IPC and he shall undergo imprisonment for a period of 7 years and also pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 468 r/w 34 of IPC and accused to undergo imprisonment for a period of 2 years and shall also pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 471 r/w 34 of IPC; shall undergo imprisonment for a period of 8 years and shall also pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 14A of Foreigners Act, 1946; and shall undergo imprisonment for a period of 8 years and shall also pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 14B of the Foreigners Act. 50,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 14A of Foreigners Act, 1946; and shall undergo imprisonment for a period of 8 years and shall also pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 14B of the Foreigners Act. The trial Court has passed an order that all the sentences shall run concurrently. The amount involved in this case is only Rs. 25,000/-. The accused has not been convicted for any offences prior to this present case. The appellant has no source of income. 12. Learned counsel for the appellant has pointed out that the offence under Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 3 years or with fine which may extend to Rs. 5,00,000/- or with both whereas the trial Court has passed a sentence for a period of 5 years, which is not sustainable under law. The appellant is in judicial custody for a period of 5 years and sought for modification of the sentence passed by the trial Court. 13. The Circle Inspector of Police, C.E.N (Cyber, Economic, Narcotics) Police, Tumakuru laid a charge sheet against accused Nos.1 and 2 alleging that the offence punishable under Section 66(c) and Section 66(d) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 471 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Section 14A and Section 14B of the Foreigners Act, 1946. To prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution has examined 18 witnesses as PW1 to PW18 and 66 documents were marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P66 and 5 documents were marked as Ex.C1 to Ex.C5. and 91 material objects marked as MO No.1 to MO.No.91. Though the learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is not going to press the judgment of conviction passed against the accused, I have examined the materials placed before this Court as to whether the trial Court has properly examined the materials placed by the prosecution. 14. On careful examination of the materials placed before this Court, I do not find any factual or legal error/illegality in the order of conviction passed by the trial Court. 15. 14. On careful examination of the materials placed before this Court, I do not find any factual or legal error/illegality in the order of conviction passed by the trial Court. 15. The trial Court has passed the sentence as under: "Convicts (A-1 and A-2) shall undergo Imprisonment for a period of five (5) years and shall also pay a fine of Rs.2,00,000/- each for the offence punishable U/S.66 of Information Technology Act, 2000 r/w S.34 of IPC. In default of payment of fine, they shall undergo simple imprisonment for a term of one (1) year. Convicts (A-1 and A-2) shall undergo Imprisonment for a period of three (3) years and shall also pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- each for the offence punishable U/S.66(c) of Information Technology Act, 2000 r/w S.34 of IPC. In default of payment of fine, they shall undergo simple imprisonment for a term of six (6) months. Convicts (A-1 and A-2) shall undergo imprisonment for a period of seven (7) years, and shall also pay a fine of Rs.50.000/- each for the offence punishable U/S.468 r/w S.34 of IPC. In default of payment of fine, they shall undergo simple imprisonment for a term of three (3) months. Convicts (A-1 and A-2) shall undergo imprisonment for a period of two (2) years, and shall also pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- each for the offence punishable U/S.471 r/w S.34 of IPC. In default of payment of fine, they shall undergo simple imprisonment for a term of one (1) month. Convicts (A-1 and A-2) shall undergo Imprisonment for a period of eight (8) years and shall also pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- each for the offence punishable U/S.14A of Foreigners Act, 1946. In default of payment of fine, they shall undergo simple imprisonment for a term of three (3) months. Convicts (A-1 and A-2) shall undergo Imprisonment for a period of eight (8 years) and shall also pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- each for the offence punishable U/S.14B of Foreigners Act, 1946. In default of payment of fine, they shall undergo simple Imprisonment for a term of three (3) months. Convict No. 1 and 2 (A-1 and A-2) are entitled for the benefit of set off period as provided under Section 428 of Cr.P.C. All the sentences shall run concurrently. In default of payment of fine, they shall undergo simple Imprisonment for a term of three (3) months. Convict No. 1 and 2 (A-1 and A-2) are entitled for the benefit of set off period as provided under Section 428 of Cr.P.C. All the sentences shall run concurrently. Office to issue conviction warrant of convicts (A-1 and A- 2) accordingly and furnish a free copy of the judgment and sentence to the convicts (A-1 and A-2) forthwith. A free copy of the judgment may also be forwarded to the District Magistrate as required under Section 365 of Cr.P.C." 16. The learned counsel for the appellant has rightly pointed out that the maximum sentence for the offence punishable under Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, is that if a person dishonestly or fraudulently does any act referred to in Section 43, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 3 years or with a fine which may extend to Rs. 5,00,000/- or with both. There is force in the said submission. The trial Court has committed an error in imposing sentence for a period of 5 years instead of maximum for a period of 3 years. The cause title of this judgment itself reveals that accused No.1 arrested on 07.12.2020 and 5 years will be completed on 06.12.2025. The trial Court has passed a sentence for a period of 7 years for the offence punishable under Section 468 r/w Section 34 of IPC and 8 years each for the offence under Section 14A and Section 14B of the Foreigners Act, 1946. The offence punishable under Section 14A and Section14B reads as under: "14A. The trial Court has passed a sentence for a period of 7 years for the offence punishable under Section 468 r/w Section 34 of IPC and 8 years each for the offence under Section 14A and Section 14B of the Foreigners Act, 1946. The offence punishable under Section 14A and Section14B reads as under: "14A. Penalty for entry in restricted areas, etc — Whoever — (a) enters into any area in India, which is restricted for his entry under any order made under this Act, or any direction given in pursuance thereof, without obtaining a permit from the authority, notified by the Central Government in the Official Gazette, for this purpose or remains in such area beyond the period specified in such permit for his stay; or (b) enters into or stays in any area in India without the valid documents required for such entry or for such stay, as the case may be, under the provisions of any order made under this Act or any direction given in pursuance thereof, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than two years, but may extend to eight years and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than ten thousand rupees but may extend to fifty thousand rupees; and if he has entered into a bond in pursuance of clause (f) of sub-section (2) of section 3, his bond shall be forfeited, and any person bound thereby shall pay the penalty thereof, or show cause to the satisfaction of the convicting Court why such penalty should not be paid by him. 14B. Penalty for using forged passport. — Whoever knowingly uses a forged passport for entering into India or remains therein without the authority of law for the time being in force shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than two years, but may extend to eight years and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than ten thousand rupees but may extend to fifty thousand rupees." 17. A plain reading of the above mentioned penal provisions clearly states that the offence punishable under Section 14A and Section 14B shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than 2 years but may extend to 8 years. A plain reading of the above mentioned penal provisions clearly states that the offence punishable under Section 14A and Section 14B shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than 2 years but may extend to 8 years. In the case on hand, the amount involved in this crime is only Rs. 25,000/-. The accused is in judicial custody since the date of his arrest. However, the trial Court has imposed the maximum sentence of 8 years. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that since the accused has no source of income and is in judicial custody for the past 5 years, is unable to pay the fine amount as imposed by the trial Court, which is on higher side. The prosecution has not placed any materials before this Court or before the trial Court that the appellant has sufficient means to pay the fine amount. The present appellant is not convicted for any offence prior to this commission of offence. Considering the age of the appellant at the time of commission of offence and nature and gravity of offence and the financial position of the appellant, it is just and proper to reduce the sentence from 8 years to 5 years for the offence punishable under Section 14A and Section 14B of the Foreigners Act, 1946 and in view of the provision of Section 66 of Information Technology Act, it is necessary to reduce the period of sentence from 5 years to 3 years. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is partly allowed. (ii) The Order of Conviction passed by the II Additional District & Session Judge, Tumakuru, in SC No.56/2022, dated 30.02.2024 is confirmed. The sentence passed by the II Additional District & Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, in SC No.56/2022 dated 30.12.2024 is modified as under: (a) Accused No.1/appellant shall undergo imprisonment for a period of 3 years and shall also pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 r/w Section 34 of IPC and accused No.1 shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months. (b) Appellant/Accused No.1 shall undergo imprisonment for a period of 3 years and shall also pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 r/w Section 34 of IPC and accused No.1 shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months. (b) Appellant/Accused No.1 shall undergo imprisonment for a period of 3 years and shall also pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 66(c) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 r/w Section 34 of IPC. In default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months. (c) Appellant/Accused No.1 shall undergo imprisonment for a period of 5 years and shall pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- fine for the offence punishable under Section 468 r/w Section 34 of IPC. In default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months. (d) Appellant/Accused No.1 shall undergo imprisonment for a period of 2 years and shall pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 471 r/w Section 34 of IPC. In default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 1 month. (e) Appellant/Accused No.1 shall undergo imprisonment for a period of 5 years and pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 14A of the Foreigners Act, 1946. In default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months. (f) Appellant/Accused No.1 shall undergo imprisonment for a period of 5 years and shall also pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 14B of the Foreigners Act, 1946. In default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months. (g) Appellant/Accused No.1/appellant is entitled for the benefit of set-off period as provided under Section 428 of Cr.P.C. (h) All the sentences shall run concurrently. Issue modified conviction warrant accordingly.