THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1791 OF 2003 ORDER: 1 The petitioner and others were tried by the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Peddapuram, East Godavari District in C.C.No.17 of 1998 for the offence punishable under section 420 of IPC. The trial court, after full fledged trial, found the petitioner guilty of the said offence and accordingly convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and also to pay a fine of Rs.300/- in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month. The said judgment dated 16.07.2001 was questioned by way of filing Criminal Appeal No.260 of 2001 and the learned VI Additional Sessions Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry by his judgment dated 12.11.2001 while confirming the said findings given by the trial court dismissed the said appeal. Hence the petitioner approached this court and filed the present revision. 2 Brief facts are that the petitioner along with other accused induced P.W.1 that they will provide job for P.W.1 in railways as ticket collector if he pay Rs.40,000/- to them and accordingly P.W.1 paid the said amount to the accused. P.W.1 waited for a long time hoping that he would receive the appointment order but in vain. Thereafter the accused asked him to come to Secunderabad and there they asked him to pay Rs.30,000/- more for getting the job, otherwise he will not get the job. Believing their words, P.W.1 paid the said amount to them. But, ultimately as no appointment order was given, P.W.1 gave a report before the police which was registered as a case in Cr.No.15 of 1997 for the offence punishable under section 420 of IPC and after completion of investigation the police filed the charge sheet. 3 Heard. 4 As seen from the record, the appeal was dismissed on 12.11.2003 and the petitioner was taken into custody on the same day itself and it is only after admission of this revision and granting of bail by this court on 03.12.2003, the petitioner came out of the jail. From the above, it is clear that the petitioner was in jail for a period of more than 40 days. As the said sentence imposed by the courts below is only imprisonment for one year, and as the petitioner was in jail for about 40 days this court takes a lenient view. 5 Accordingly, the said sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of one year imposed on the petitioner by the courts below is reduced to that of the period, which the petitioner had already undergone. Excepting the above modification, in all other aspects this revision is dismissed. -------------- 28.10.2010 Kvsn