Judgment : Instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the judgment dated 11.07.2006 passed in Cr. Appeal No.19/2005 by learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track), Balotra HQ Barmer, by which the appellate court dismissed the appeal of the petitioners and upheld the judgments dated 01.06.2001 & 05.07.2001, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barmer, in Cr. Regular Case No.142/1997 by which the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the petitioners as under : S.No. Offence Sentence Fine Sentence in default of fine 1. 457 IPC 2 years SI Rs.100/- One month SI 2. 380 IPC 2 years SI Rs.100/- One month SI 2. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 3. Brief facts of the case are that on 11.02.1997, complainant Bhomaram submitted a written report at Police Station Kotwali, Barmer 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 petitioners. 4. After completion of investigation, the police filed challan against the petitioners. Thereafter, the trial court framed charges against the accused petitioners 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 10 witnesses in support of its case. Thereafter, statements of the accused petitioners were recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C. 6. Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide impugned judgment dated 01.06.2001 & 05.07.2001 convicted and sentenced, respectively, the accused-petitioners for aforesaid offence. 7. Being aggrieved by their conviction and sentence, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court, which came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 11.07.2006. 8. Hence, this revision petition. 9. At the threshold, learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submits that he does not challenge the finding of conviction but since the occurrence is related to the year 1997 and out of total sentence of two years S.I., the accused petitioners have remained in custody for some time, therefore, it is prayed that the sentence awarded to petitioners for the aforesaid offences may be reduced to the period already undergone by them. 10. 10. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused- petitioners and submitted that there is neither any occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused petitioners nor any compassion or sympathy is called for in the said case. 11. 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-petitioners. 12. Undisputedly, the incident relates back to the year 1997 and the petitioners have remained in custody for some time, out of total sentence of two years SI, so also suffered the mental agony and trauma of protracted trial. Thus, looking to the over-all circumstances and the fact that the petitioners have 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. 13. Accordingly, the revision petition is partly allowed. While maintaining the petitioners’ conviction for offence under Sections 457 & 380 IPC, the sentence awarded to them for the aforesaid offences is hereby reduced to the period already undergone. The fine amount is also waived. The petitioners are on bail. They need not surrender. Their bail bonds are cancelled. 14. The records of the courts below be sent back forthwith.