SATYA NARAYAN MAHTO Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision application has been directed against the order dated 19th July, 1998 passed by 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge. West Champaran Bettiah in Cr. Appeal No. 69 of 1996, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed. The petitioner was convicted by the Trial Court under Section 3 of the RP (U.P.) Act and was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-.

(2.) According to the case of the prosecution, the petitioner was caught with Gazal Pin by the RPF personnel and that was a railway property Both the Courts below have given concurrent findings that the Gazal Pin recovered from the possession of the petitioner was a railway property. The admitted position is that the petitioner was a railway employee and the value of the Gazal Pin was Rs. 100/-. The petitioner also went in custody on the alleged date of occurrence but was released on provisional bail on the following day.

(3.) I have perused the judgments of both the Courts below and i am of the view that no interference is required in the concurrent findings of facts recorded by the Courts below. However, since the period of eight years has elapsed since the date of occurrence and the value of the article said to have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner is negligible, I feel that the period undergone by the petitioner in custody is sufficient punishment to him. Accordingly, the sentence of fine as awarded to the petitioner is reduced to the period undergone by the petitioner in custody.