THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1439 of 2004 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner-accused against the judgment, dated 17.8.2004, made by the VI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ongole, in C.A.No.56 of 2002 modifying the judgment dated 28.3.2002 passed by the III Additional Munsif Magistrate, Ongole, in C.C.No.265 of 2001. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: On 14.4.1997 at 11.20 p.m., the then Sub Divisional Engineer viz., K.V.S. Ayyangar, Assistant Engineer viz., P. Subrahmanyam and other staff visited the premises of M/s. Vengamamba P.V.C. Pipes Industries, which is located at Chimakurthy village and which belongs to the petitioner-accused. On that date, all the officials noticed that the petitioner-accused unauthorizedly used energy from LT over head line pole No.SS.15/1/9/2 and committed theft of energy in order to run the factory and thereby caused loss to the Department to a tune of Rs.2,65,248/-. Subsequently, K.V.S. Ayyangar-the then Sub Divisional Engineer submitted the inspection notes and other documents to the Inspector of Police, Anti Power Theft Squad. Hence, a charge sheet was laid against the petitioner-accused. The same was taken cognizance as C.C.No.265 of 2001 for the offence under Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act. On appreciation of both oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found the petitioner-accused guilty of the offence under Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act and accordingly, sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. The said judgment was questioned by way of filing an appeal in C.A.No.56 of 2002 before the VI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ongole. The learned Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction of the petitioner-accused, but modified the sentence of one year simple imprisonment to three months simple imprisonment while upholding the sentence of fine amount. Questioning the said judgment, the petitioner-accused filed the present revision. Learned Counsel for the petitioner-accused fairly conceded that this is not a fit case for interference, but he requested to take a lenient view having regard to the fact that the petitioner was in jail for a period of one week. Heard and perused the material available on record. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the nature of the offence committed by the petitioner-accused, I feel that the judgment of the appellate Court does not warrant any interference. But however, having regard to the fact that the offence is of the year 1997 and the petitioner-accused has been wandering around the Courts since 1997, and in view of the fact that the petitioner was in jail for a period of one week, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case wherein a lenient view can be taken. Accordingly, the sentence imposed by the lower appellate Court for the offence under Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act against the petitioner-accused is reduced to the period already undergone. In the result, the sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence under Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act against the petitioner-accused is reduced to the period, which the petitioner has already undergone, while maintaining the sentence of fine amount. With the above modification, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. _______________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 10th March, 2011 Nn THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1439 of 2004 10.3.2011