Judgment : 1. Instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 23.01.2003 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities), Udaipur in Cr. Appeal No.13/2002, by which the appellate court dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and upheld the judgment dated 19.10.2002, passed by learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, No.2, Udaipur, in Cr. Case No.535/2002 by which the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the petitioner as under : S.No. Offence Sentence Fine Sentence in default of fine 1. 457 IPC 5 year RI Rs.200/- 1 month Addl. SI 2. 380 IPC 5 year RI Rs.200/- 1 month Addl. SI 2. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 3. Brief facts of the case are that on 05.06.2002, complainant Mangilal submitted a written report at Police Station Amba Mata in respect of a theft committed in his house by some unknown miscreants. On this report, Police registered a case and started investigation. During investigation, Police arrested the petitioner. 4. After completion of investigation, the police filed challan against the present petitioner. Thereafter, the trial court framed charges against the petitioner for offences under Sections 457, 380 IPC, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 5. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as 7 witnesses in support of its case. Thereafter, statement of the the accused-petitioner was recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C. Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide impugned judgment dated 19.10.2002 convicted and sentenced the accused-petitioner for aforesaid offence. 6. Being aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court, which came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 23.01.2003. 7. Hence, this revision petition. 8. At the threshold, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that he does not challenge the finding of conviction but since the occurrence is related to the year 2002 and out of total sentence of five years R.I., the accused petitioner has already served about five months of imprisonment, therefore, it is prayed that the sentence awarded to petitioner for the aforesaid offences may be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 9. 9. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused- petitioner and submitted that there is neither any occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused petitioner nor any compassion or sympathy is called for in the said case. 10. I have perused the evidence of the prosecution as well as defence and the judgment passed by the courts below regarding conviction of the accused-petitioner. 11. Undisputedly, the incident relates back to the year 2002 and the petitioner has so far undergone a period of about five months in custody, out of total sentence of five years, so also suffered the mental agony and trauma of protracted trial. Thus, looking to the over-all circumstances and the fact that the petitioner has remained behind the bars for a considerable time, it will be just and proper, if the sentence awarded by the trial court for offence under Sections 457 & 380 IPC and affirmed by the appellate court is reduced to the period already undergone. 12. Accordingly, the revision petition is partly allowed. While maintaining the petitioner’s conviction for offence under Sections 457 & 380 IPC, the sentence awarded to him for the aforesaid offences is hereby reduced to the period already undergone. The fine amount is also waived. The petitioner is on bail. He need not surrender. His bail bonds are cancelled. 13. The records of the courts below be sent back forthwith.