THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1806 OF 2004 JUDGMENT: The petitioners herein, who are A-2 and A-3, respectively, along with another person-Accused No.1 were tried in C.C.No.50 of 2000 on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Addanki, for the offence punishable under Section 324 read with 34 IPC. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 5 and exhibited Exs.P-1 and P-5. On behalf of defence, neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced. The learned Magistrate having considered the said evidence, both oral and documentary, came to the conclusion that the accused are guilty of the offence punishable under Section 324 IPC, and accordingly, by his judgment, dated 19.10.2004, convicted and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for three months each for the offence punishable under Section 324 IPC. The said judgment was questioned by the accused by filing Criminal Appeal No.209 of 2001 and the learned VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ongole, by the judgment, dated 12.10.2004, found accused No.1 not guilty of the said offence, but, found the petitioners herein-accused Nos.2 and 3 guilty of the offence punishable under Section 324 IPC, but, however, modified the sentence of imprisonment imposed on them by the trial Court from rigorous imprisonment for six months to simple imprisonment for two months each. Hence, the petitioners approached this Court and filed the present Criminal Revision Case. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: - A dispute arose between the accused group and the de facto complainant’s group in Assembly and parliamentary elections; that the accused grew wild against LW-1 on 12.01.2000 at about 8 pm., while he was talking with L.W-3 infront of Anjaneyulu hotel; that accused with common intention of causing hurt to L.W-1 secured the iron rod, knife and stick and beat L.W-1 and caused injuries to him. Later, on a report given by L.W-1 to Police, a case was registered against the accused and after completion of investigation into the case, the charge sheet was filed. Learned counsel for the petitioners-accused fairly conceded that it is not a fit case for interference, but, however, requested this Court to take a lenient view having regard to the fact that the petitioners were in jail for a week. Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel, this Court looked into the record. The impugned judgment was pronounced on 12.10.2004 and immediately, the petitioners were arrested and only by virtue of the bail granted by this Court while admitting the Revision on 19.10.2004 they were released. Further, as the sentence of imprisonment imposed on them by the lower appellate Court is only simple imprisonment for two months and the offence is of the year 2000 i.e., 11 years have lapsed, this Court is of the view that a lenient view can be taken. Accordingly, the sentence of simple imprisonment of two months imposed on the petitioners herein-A-2 and A-3 by the lower appellate Court for the offence punishable under Section 324 IPC is reduced to that of the period already undergone by them, while maintaining the sentence of fine. Except the said modification, in all other aspects, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. __________________________________ JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA 31stMarch 2011 DR