HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 869 OF 2004 DATED 30th JUNE, 2010. BETWEEN Kakarla Penchalaiah and ors …..Petitioners/Accused and The State of AP, Rep. By its Public Prosecutor …Respondent HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 869 OF 2004 ORDER: This Criminal Revision Case under Sections 397 and 401 of the Cr.P.C. is ﬁled aggrieved by the judgment dated 28.04.2004 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 103 of 2002 by the learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Kadapa, conﬁrming the conviction and sentence recorded against the petitioner/Accused for the oﬀence punishable under Section 324 IPC in the order dated 15.03.2002 in C.C.No. 9 of 2000 by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Badvel. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 9.7.1999 at 10.00AM when P.W.1 went to the bore- well situated near their house in Harijanawada, he chastised A-1 who was present there for writing letters to Bodisettipalli village and to spoil the reputation of one Penchalamma. There was verbal altercation between them and in the meanwhile A2 to A5 came and joined with A.1. All of them attacked P.W.1 with common intention and caused some bleeding injuries. When P.Ws. 2 to 4 intervened, they were also attacked by the accused. Based on the same, a case in crime No. 88 of 1999 under Sections 324 r/w 34 IPC was registered against the accused and the police investigated into. After ﬁling the charge sheet, the trial Court took the cognizance of the offence on file against the accused. The trial Court on a full-ﬂedged trial and appreciation of the evidence on record found the accused guilty of the oﬀence punishable under Section 326 IPC, and accordingly convicted and sentenced A.1 to A.4 to undergo R.I. for a period one year and to pay ﬁne of Rs.2,000/- each, in default, to suﬀer S.I. for a period of three months each, for the oﬀence under Section 326 r/w 34 IPC, and, sentenced A.5 to undergo R.I. for a period of one year and to pay ﬁne of Rs.2000/- in default to suﬀer S.I. for a period of three months for the oﬀence under Section 326 IPC.. On appeal being Criminal Appeal. No. 103 of 2003 preferred by the petitioners/accused, the lower Appellate Court, on appreciation of the evidence on record, altered the oﬀence to under Section 324 IPC and dismissed the appeal conﬁrming the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court. Hence this revision. It is needles to state that the powers of the High Court in exercising its jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. are truncated and unless the ﬁnding recorded by the Court below is shown to be perverse or incorrect or illegal or not based on any evidence on record, the judgment under challenge needs interference. In the present case, on a perusal of the evidence available on record and on hearing the learned Counsel appearing on either side, this Court ﬁnds no illegality or irregularity or perversity in the ﬁndings recorded by the Court below so as to interfere with the same. However, the learned Counsel for the petitioners conﬁning his argument to the inﬂicting of the sentence, submitted that the petitioners have suﬀered a stigma of conviction in the society; that the incident took place in a spur of moment; that after lapse of a decade of the incident, if the petitioners are sent to judicial custody, the same may cause prejudice to them and that the petitioners are poor and they have to look after their families members as they being the breadwinners. The learned Counsel submitted that the petitioners can be shown some lenience insofar as the sentence ordered by the Court below is concerned. As there is no serious objection from the side of the learned Public Prosecutor, this Court, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence available on record, and submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioners, thought it ﬁt to show some lenience on the petitioners. Considering the same, the conviction recorded by the Courts below is conﬁrmed, however, sentence recorded against the petitioners/accused is set aside and in its place, the petitioners are directed to pay ﬁne of Rs.3,000/- each apart from the ﬁne amount already imposed by the Courts below, within a period of four weeks from the date of copy of this order is made ready. Subject to the above modiﬁcation in sentence, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. ----------------------------------- JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO DATED 30th JUNE, 2010. Msnr.