THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.322 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: 1 This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 29.01.2007 in S.C.No.33 of 2006 on the file of the court of the Assistant Sessions Judge, (FTC) Luxettipet whereby the appellant herein along with others was tried for the offence punishable under section 395 of IPC and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and also to pay a fine of Rs.200/-, in default of payment of fine he shall suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months. 2 Brief facts are that on the intervening night of 08/09-12-2002 at about 1.45 AM six unknown persons entered the house of P.W.1 and thronged into their house by wielding knives and made them to sit silently and tied their hands to the back and snatched gold and silver ornaments and other valuable articles from his house. Thereafter they entered into the room of his brother Ramanandaswamy and had taken away cash of Rs.4,000/- apart from other valuable items. In that connection a case in Cr.No.179 of 2002 under section 395 of IPC was registered by police Luxettipet and investigated into. During the course of investigation the appellant and others were arrested at Railway station Mandamarri on 07.10.2003 and the accused also confessed about the commission of the offence and part of the stolen property was also seized from them. After completion of investigation the police filed the charge sheet, which was taken on file as PRC No.2 of 2006 by the learned Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Luxettipet and after committal the same was numbered as S.C.No.285 of 2006. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 12 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.32 and M.Os.1 to 5. 3 When the matter is taken up for hearing, Smt. A. Gayathri Reddy, the learned counsel for the appellant fairly conceded that this 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 is in jail for more than seven years as on today. 4 In the light of the said submission of the learned counsel for the appellant, this court looked into the record. Apparently the appellant was arrested on 07.10.2003 and every since he is in jail. 5 Having regard to the fact that the sentence of imprisonment imposed by the trial court on the appellant is rigorous imprisonment for ten years and the appellant has been in jail for the last more than seven years, this court is of the view that the said sentence of rigorous imprisonment of ten years imposed on the appellant by the court below can be reduced to that of the period already undergone by him. 6 Accordingly, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of ten years imposed on the appellant - A.4, by the court below in S.C.No.33 of 2006 is reduced to that of the period which the petitioner had already undergone. 7 Excepting the said modification in respect of imprisonment, in all other aspects, this appeal is dismissed. ----------------- Sri T.G.K, J. 18.02.2011 Kvsn