Narendra Kumar Jain, J. - (1.) The matter is listed for orders on the application for suspension of sentence of the accused-appellant on the ground that the appellant has already remained in jail for about 4 years and 8 months, whereas the total sentence awarded by the trial Court is 7 years rigorous imprisonment, but, on the request of learned counsel for both the parties, the appeal itself is heard finally and being disposed of.
(2.) The only argument raised by learned counsel Shri Ravi Yadav appearing on behalf of the appellant is about reduction of sentence of imprisonment passed by the trial Court. He has not challenged the impugned judgment of trial Court on merits. He contended that the main accused in the case was Ashok Kumar Yadav, and initially F.I.R. No. 4/1997 under Sections 3 and 3/9 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, was registered; subsequently, on the basis of some information received in the matter, another F.I.R. No. 1/2000 was registered, wherein challan was filed against 7 accused-persons, namely, Ashok Kumar Yadav, Mohammad Sabir @ Babu Khan, Samsunisha @ Mariam, Fazru, Isab @ Yusuf, Idrish @ Shakir and Molana Abdul Mazid.
(3.) After completion of trial in Sessions Case No. 110/2000 (arising out of F.I.R. No. 1/2000), the learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur, acquitted two accused-persons, namely, Molana Abdul Mazid and Samsunisha @ Mariam, and convicted five accused-persons, namely, Ashok Kumar Yadav, Mohammad Sabir @ Babu Khan, Fazru, Isab @ Yusuf and Idrish @ Shakir, and sentenced them under Section 3(l)(c) of the Official Secrets Act, 1923, to undergo 4 years and 5 months rigorous imprisonment. They were acquitted under Section 120-B, I.P.C.;