THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1079 of 2004 O R D E R: This Criminal Revision Case is filed against the judgment in Criminal Appeal No.25 of 2002, dated 29.06.2004 on the file of the I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, whereunder the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal confirming the judgment dated 07.01.2002 passed in C.C.No.972 of 2000 by the learned XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, whereunder the petitioner herein- accused was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- for the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC. The brief facts of the case are that on 29.2.2000 at about 3 P.M. the accused approached PW.1 at his house at Jain Estate, Park Lane, Secunderabad by introducing himself with fictitious name and address as K.Ram Mohan S/o Pratap, r/w H.No.3-6-10/7, Meera Theatre Lane, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad and wanted a computer on rent. The accused signed the rental agreement with the above fictitious name and address and paid Rs.2,250/- as advance rent for the computer for a month. When on the agreement, the accused proposed to PW.1 that the computer be sent through one of his persons for delivery with him and he will get the signature of his father on the agreement and send it through him. Accordingly, PW.1 parted with the computer system consisting of CPU, Monitor, Key Board and Mouse, sent PW.2 to deliver it to the accused and get the signature of the father of the accused on the agreement paper. PW.2 with the computer and accused left in the Auto. The accused took the auto to Sadguru compex and instructed the auto driver to wait outside the said complex with the computer. He took PW.2 to the third floor of the said complex stating that his father will be available there. After reaching third floor, the accused pretended that his father went to down floor, he will go to him and bring him to the third floor. With such representation, the accused came down leaving PW.2 in the third floor of the said building and absconded with computer in the auto. On the same day, PW.1 lodged a complaint before the police and in turn police registered it as a case in Crime No.42 of 2000 under Section 379 IPC. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. The learned counsel for the petitioner, after arguing for some time, confined his argument only in connection with the sentence imposed by the Courts below. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the offence took place in the year 2000 and ever since the date of offence, the petitioner is under humiliation during the pendency of the appeal. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is the only bread- winner in his family and he has to look after his children and, hence, he prayed to take a lenient view in imposing the sentence. Considering the above facts and circumstances, date of offence, and property involved in the crime, some leniency can be shown to the accused. Accordingly, the conviction imposed by the Courts below is confirmed, however, the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner is set aside. The petitioner/accused is directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards fine apart from the fine amount imposed by the Courts below, within a period of four weeks from the date of a copy of this order is made ready. With the above modification, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. __________________ RAJA ELANGO, J 6th July, 2010. PNV