JUDGMENT
Milap Chand Jain, J.
1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner after notice to the Public Prosecutor.
2. The petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 25 Arms Act and has been sentenced to 6 months rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo one month’s rigorous imprisonment. His conviction and sentence has been upheld in the appeal by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Hence this revision.
3. The offence under Section 25 Arms Act is well proved on the basis of the testimony of the Investigating Officer. In this case a pistol and two live cartridges were recovered on the information of the accused from the house, which was in his possession. The petitioner has therefore, been rightly convicted even on the sole testimony of the Station House Officer. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has faced trial for about 8 years and the petitioner has remained in custody and served out some sentence & the sentence awarded is severe. In my opinion ends of the justice would be served in case the substantive sentence is reduced to two months.
4. Accordingly, this revision petition is partly allowed, the conviction of the petitioner is maintained. However his substantive sentence is reduced to two months.