The court can reduce a sentence to the time already served when considering prolonged trials and the age of the petitioner, while upholding the conviction.

JUDGMENT :

Manoj Kumar Garg, J.

1. By this revision, the petitioner-convict is challenging the judgment and order dated 17.09.2003 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Srigangangar whereby, the learned Judge partly allowed the appeal filed by the petitioner and while upholding the conviction of the petitioner for offence under Sections 420 and 471 IPC, reduced the sentence awarded under Section 471 IPC to one year simple imprisonment and thus, the petitioner has been sentenced as under:

2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as set up is that on 21.03.1991, the office of Superintendent of Police, Sriganganagar received a complaint to the effect that the petitioner has submitted a transfer certification of Baba Haridwari Public School, 2 ML, Sriganganagar on the basis of which, he got selected as Driver in RSRTC. On verification of the education certificate, the said certificate was found to be forged.

3. On the basis of the above report, FIR No. 136/1991 was registered by the police for offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and the police started investigation. On completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the present petitioner. Thereafter, charges of the case were framed against the petitioner for offence under Sections 420, 468, 471 IPC. He denied the charges and claimed trial.

4. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as six witnesses and got exhibited various documents. After examining the accused petitioner under Section 313 Cr.P.C., opportunity was also given to him to lead defence evidence but he did not produce any evidence.

5. After considering the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses and the material available on record, the trial court acquitted the petitioner for offence under Section 468 IPC but convicted him for offence under Section 420 IPC and 471 IPC vide judgment dated 30.10.2001.

6. Aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 30.10.2001, passed by the learned Judicial Additional Chief Judicial magistrate, Sriganganagar, an appeal was preferred before the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Sriganganagar whereby, the conviction and sentence of the petitioner-convict under Section 420 IPC was upheld but reduced the sentence awarded for offence under Section 471 IPC from three years simple imprisonment to one year simple imprisonment with defalt stipulation.

7. At the outset, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner makes a submission that the incident relates back to year 1991 and he is now aged about 60 years. Further the petitioner has remained behind the bars for a period of 13 days, therefore, without making any interference on merits/conviction, the sentence awarded to the present petitioner may be substituted with the period of sentence already undergone by him.

8. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State vehemently opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that there is no reason to disbelieve the prosecution evidence and learned Trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the accused-petitioner. He prayed that the impugned judgment and order passed by the Court below may be sustained and sentence awarded to the accused-petitioner by the Court below be maintained by this Court.

9. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the accused-petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also gone through the entire record.

10. From the findings recorded by the trial Court, I am satisfied that learned counsel for the accused-petitioner is right in not pressing this appeal on merits. So far as reduction of