HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.885 of 2005 ORDER: This Criminal Revision Case under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is filed by the petitioners-appellants 1 to 3 against the judgment, dated 08.11.2004, rendered in Criminal Appeal No.17 of 2003 by the VI Additional Sessions Judge(FTC), Tirupathi. Initially, the first petitioner(A1) was convicted by the trial Court under section 235 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the offence under Section 326 IPC. A1 to A3 were convicted for the offence under Section 324 IPC. A-1 was sentenced to undergo RI for a period of two years and also pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to suffer SI for five months for the offence under Section 326 IPC. A-1 to A-3 were convicted for the offence under Section 324 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for a period of six months each and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- each, in default, to suffer SI or three months each. The period of remand already undergone by A1 to A3 shall be set of Under Section 428 Cr.P.C. The sentence passed against A-1 for the offence under Sections 326 and 324 IPC shall run consecutively. Assailing the said Judgment, the petitioners preferred appeal. In the appeal, the appellate court, while allowing the appeal partly, set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court for the offence under Section 326 IPC against A-1 and for the offence under Section 324 IPC against A-1 to A-3 and confirmed the judgment of trial Court in all other aspects including the fine imposed on A-1 to A-3 for the offence U/Sec.324 IPC and sentence to pay fine at Rs.3000/- with default clause to undergo SI for three months. A-1 is acquitted under Sec.235(1) Cr.P.C. for the offence U/Sec.326 IPC. Further, the appellate court directed the trial Court to refund the fine amount of Rs.5000/- paid by A-1 after expiry of the appeal time. Heard both sides. The brief facts of the prosecution case is as follows: There were disputes and differences between the accused on one hand and Manyam Krishna Reddy, M. Jayamma, Manyam Sankar Reddy and Manyam Vijayabhaskar Reddy on the other hand for the reason that the said Vijayabhaskar Reddy telephone to the wife of the first accused. Inspite of the mediations between two groups, they waited for an opportunity to wreck vengence against each other and on 14.10.2001 at about 12.30 p.m. both groups attacked each other resulting the registration of Cr.No.99 of 2001 against the accused by Sub-Inspector of Police, Gajulamandyam, for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 324, 326 and 307 read with 34 IPC. Hence the charge. Prosecution in order to substantiate its case, examined P.Ws.1 to 13 and marked Exs.P1 to P14. after completion of prosecution evidence, accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The trial Court after appreciation of the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of the accused for certain offences and convicted the accused as stated above. After arguing for sometime, learned counsel for the petitioners by not pressing the main prayer confined his arguments only to the extent of imposition of sentence and requested the Court to show some indulgence on the petitioners. This is a case where the trial Court convicted A-1 for the offence under Sections 326 and 324 IPC and the appellate Court set aside the conviction under Section 326 IPC while confirming the conviction under Section 324 IPC. In view of the findings of the Courts below and basing on the material available on record, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the same. In any event, taking into consideration the fact that the accused were only aged about 34, 41 and 37 years respectively and the alleged offence took place in the year 2001 and the case is pending since then and in view of the lapse of time, this Court is inclined to show some lenience against the petitioners in imposition of sentence. Accordingly, the conviction imposed by the trial Court as modified by the Appellate Court is hereby confirmed. However, the fine amount is reduced to Rs.1000/- and the trial Court is directed to return the remaining fine amount already paid. The criminal revision case is accordingly dismissed. ___________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Date:24.02.2011 Rns