ORDER :

Farjand Ali, J.

By way of filing the instant Criminal Revision Petition challenge has been made to the judgment dated 27.06.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.4, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Criminal appeal No.22/2023, whereby the learned appellate court affirmed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.01.2023 passed by learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No.3, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Criminal Regular Case No.601/2009; whereby the petitioner has been convicted for the offences under Sections 457 and 380 of the IPC and for each count he has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of 3 years along with a fine of Rs.2,000/- with default sentence of 1 month's simple imprisonment.

2. Bereft of elaborate details, facts relevant and essential for disposal of the instant criminal revision are that on 15.09.2009, complainant Pankaj Soni submitted a written report at the Police Station Mahamandir to the effect that his jewelry shop is situated behind Bhadwasiya School, in front of cold storage, at RTO Road. In the night of 14.09.2009 between 01.00 a.m. and 3.00 a.m. someone broke the shutter of his shop, broke the glass and stole gold and silver ornaments worth Rs.2,97,000/-. On the basis of the aforesaid report, FIR No.340/2009 was registered at the Police Station Mahamandir, Jodhpur for the offences under Sections 457 and 380 of the IPC. After usual investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the present petitioner for the offences under Sections 457 and 380 of the IPC.

3. The Learned Magistrate framed charges against the petitioner for the above offences and upon denial of guilt by him, commenced the trial. During the course of trial, the prosecution in order to prove the offences, examined as many as 8 witnesses and exhibited 11 documents. The accused, upon being confronted with the prosecution allegations, in his statement under Section 313 CrPC, denied the allegations and claimed to be innocent. No evidence was adduced from defence side. Then, after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Defence Counsel and upon meticulous appreciation of the evidence, learned trial court convicted the accused for offences under Sections 457 and 380 of the IPC vide judgment dated 10.01.2023. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction, he preferred an appeal, which was dismissed by the learned appellate court vide judgment dated 27.06.2023 affirming the judgment passed by the trial court. Hence, this revision petition is filed before this court.

4. After arguing the case on merits to some extent, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he will not assail conviction of the petitioner and confines his arguments to the alternative prayer of reduction of the sentence awarded by the trial court. He submits that the incident in the present case pertains to the year 2009. The offences involved are trespassing and theft. The petitioner has already suffered agony of protracted trial of 14 years. The petitioner remained in custody for around 5 months during trial and presently he is in judicial custody after passing of the judgment in appeal. The petitioner is a poor person and the only bread-earner of his family. With these submissions, learned counsel prays that by taking a lenient view, the sentence awarded to the petitioner may be reduced to the period already undergone.

5. Learned public prosecutor has, of course, been able to defend the case on merits but does not refute the fact that the petitioner has remained behind the bars for some time during trial and presently he is in judicial custody.

6. Since the revision petition again