HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1008 OF 2005 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is preferred by the petitioner- accused against the judgment, dated 23.06.2005, rendered in Criminal Appeal No.25 of 2005 by the Principal Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru. 2. The petitioner-accused was prosecuted in C.C.No.464 of 1999 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468 and 471 IPC. After due trial, the learned II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Eluru, convicted the petitioner under Section 248 (2) Cr.P.C. and accordingly sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.4,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Section 468 IPC, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Section 465 IPC, and further directed that all the sentences shall run consecutively, vide judgment, dated 17.01.2005. 3. As against the said conviction, the petitioner filed Criminal Appeal No.25 of 2005 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge at Eluru and the learned Sessions Judge, having gone through both the oral and documentary evidence, dismissed the appeal while confirming the conviction and sentence recorded against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate, vide judgment, dated 23.06.2005. Challenging the same, the petitioner preferred this revision. 4. Heard both sides. 5. After arguing for sometime, learned counsel for the petitioner by not pressing the main prayer confined his arguments to the extent of imposition of sentence and requested the Court to show some indulgence on the petitioner. 6. In view of the said submission and also the fact that the trial Court as well as the appellate Court have given concurrent findings, this Court is of the view that merits and demerits of the prosecution case and the impugned judgment need not be adjudicated. 7. It is represented that the petitioner is not continuing in the job secured by him by way of producing forged certificates, he has already suffered imprisonment for a period of two months, and he is the only bread winner of his family and has to look after the welfare of his children. Admittedly, the offence took place in the year 1998 and for all these years the petitioner suffered humiliation. In these circumstances, this Court is inclined to show some lenience towards the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, the conviction recorded against the petitioner-accused by the trial Court for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468 and 465 IPC as confirmed by the appellate Court is confirmed and the sentence of imprisonment is modified to that of the period already undergone by the petitioner- accused. The fine amount imposed for the said offences by the trial Court as confirmed by the appellate Court is not interfered with. 9. In all other respects, the impugned judgment shall stand confirmed. 10. With the above modification, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. _________________ RAJA ELANGO, J 21st January, 2011 cbs HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1008 OF 2005 DATE: 21.01.2011 Between : Bellapu Nageswararao … Petitioner/ Accused and State of A.P. ..Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1008 of 2005 (Disposed of) 21st January, 2011 cbs