THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1900 of 2004 ORDER: 1 The petitioner herein was tried as accused in C.C.No.2 of 1998 for the offence punishable under sections 174, 177, 181 and 420 of IPC by the learned Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Alampur. The learned Magistrate having assessed the entire evidence both oral and documentary found the petitioner guilty of the said offences and accordingly sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 1 ½ months for the offence punishable under section 174 of IPC, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 1 ½ months for the offence punishable under section 177 of IPC, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 9 months and also to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine he shall suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under section 181 of IPC and further sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for two years and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default of payment of fine he shall suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence punishable under section 420 of IPC. As against the said judgment dated 24.08.2001, the petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No.127 of 2001 and the learned III Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Mahabubnagar at Gadwal, by his judgment dated 29.10.2004 while concurring with the findings given by the trial court, dismissed the said appeal. Questioning the same the accused before the trial court preferred this revision. 2 The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 15.08.1994 the Sub-Judge, Gadwal gave a report stating that in lok adalat settlement a decree was passed in O.P.No.1066 of 1994 on the file of Sub-Court Gadwal for Rs.40,910/- in the names of Bojjanna and Shashanna entitling them to receive half of the compensation amount as per award No.15/79 of Special Deputy Collector, SSP, Wanaparthy pertaining to Maramungala Village. But as against the said decree, the petitioner received a total sum of Rs.40,910/- though he was actually entitled for only Rs.20,445/-. In the said complaint it was also stated that inspite of giving notice and direction to appear before the court, the petitioner intentionally avoiding to attend the court and knowingly and having full knowledge that he was entitled to receive half of the amount as per the said decree, by furnishing false information which he knew that the said information is false, received Rs.40,910/- before the Lok Adalat by making false statement. 3 Heard both sides. 4 The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this is not a fit case for interference, but, however, he requested the court to take a lenient view in so far as the sentence of imprisonment is concerned. 5 Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner this court looked into the record. The appellate court dismissed the appeal on 29.10.2004 and the petitioner was taken into custody immediately. It is only after the revision was admitted and bail was granted by this court on 10.11.2004, the petitioner came out of the jail. From the above, the petitioner was in jail for a period of 13 days. In that view of the matter, since the offence for which the petitioner was convicted and sentenced relates to the year 1994, and as the petitioner was in jail for a period of 13 days, this court takes a lenient view and reducing the said sentences of imprisonment imposed by the courts blow to that of the period, which the petitioner had already undergone. 6 Excepting the above modification, this revision in all other aspects is dismissed. -------------- 28.01.2011 Kvsn