THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1570 of 2008 JUDGMENT: The appellant was tried by the Principal Sessions Judge, East Godavari, Rajahmundry, in S.C.No.351 of 2006 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code. During the course of trial, on behalf of the prosecution, P.Ws.1 to 9 were examined and Exs.P-1 to P-20 were marked, besides M.Os.1 to 13. On behalf of the accused, neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced. The learned Sessions Judge having analysed the entire evidence on record, by his judgment, dated, 05.09.2007, found the accused not guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, but, however, found him guilty of the offence punishable under Section 304(1) IPC and accordingly, sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months. Hence, the present Criminal Appeal. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the deceased, being a scooter mechanic by profession, is having a rowdy sheet and is a notorious criminal involved in several grave offences. Under such circumstances, on 31.10.2005 at about, the deceased demanded the accused to arrange an amount of Rs.5,000/- by the next day morning and if he fail to do so threatened to kill him. On 31.10.2005, at about 9 am., the accused went and met the deceased and tried to convince the deceased. Then the deceased directed the accused to do a murder on his behalf, for which the accused refused. On the same day, again the deceased demanded the accused to pay the said amount and as the accused failed to pay the same, the deceased got angry and cut the right hand index finger and left hand of the accused with a blade and also beat the wife and children of the accused. The deceased also threatened to kill the accused. Therefore, the accused apprehending danger in the hands of the deceased, on 31.10.2005, while the deceased alone was sleeping in his house, he entered into the house and picked up a stone and beat with it on the head of the deceased and later, also dropped two stones on the head of the deceased and intentionally killed the deceased. Further, the accused concealed the blood stained stones and went away. Later, the accused scared of being arrested by the Police, approached the Panchayat Secretary of Rajahmundry and confessed about the killing of the deceased. On the statement of the accused, a crime was registered and after completing all the formalities of investigation i.e., conducting inquest over the dead body of the deceased, conducting of post-mortem examination, receipt of RFSL report, etc., charge sheet was filed. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Smt A.Gayatri Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner 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 appellant was put in jail on 02.11.2005 and later, he was released by virtue of the bail granted by the trial Court on 19.12.2006. She further submitted that immediately, after passing of the impugned judgment by the Court below, the appellant was taken into custody and ever since he is in jail. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. In the light of the said submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court instructed the Public Prosecutor to get instructions. He, on instructions, submitted that the appellant is in jail for the last more than about three years. Having regard to the fact that the sentence of imprisonment imposed by the Court below on the appellant-accused is rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and the appellant has been in jail for the last more than about 3 years, this Court is of the view that ends of justice would be met if the said sentence of imprisonment imposed on the appellant by the Court below is reduced to that of the period already undergone by him. Accordingly, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of five years imposed on the appellant by the Principal Sessions Judge, East Godavari, Rajahmundry, in Sessions Case No.351 of 2006, by his judgment, dated 05.09.2007, is reduced to that of the period already undergone by him, while maintaining the sentence of fine. Except the said modification in the sentence of imprisonment, in all other aspects, this Criminal Appeal stands dismissed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA 09th November 2010 DR