THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.881 OF 2004 ORDER: 1 Petitioner was tried as sole accused in C.C.No.57 of 2001 by the learned Special Mobile Magistrate, Guntur for the offences punishable under sections 420 and 468 of IPC. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 11 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.19. On an analysis of the said evidence, the trial court found the petitioner guilty of both the offences and accordingly sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year on each count and also to pay a fine of Rs.500/- for each offence, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months for each offence by judgment dated 24.03.2003. Questioning the said judgment, the petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No.140 of 2003 and the learned VIII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Guntur by his judgment dated 14.05.2004, while holding that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence punishable under section 468 of IPC acquitted the petitioner of the said offence. However, the appellate court found the petitioner guilty of the offence punishable under section 420 of IPC and accordingly confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court. Hence the present revision. 2 The case of the prosecution in brief is that the petitioner falsely promised P.Ws.2 to 10 and 19 others that they would be allotted house plots at Krishnababu colony in Guntur on payment of Rs.500/- by each person and accordingly all those persons were made to part with Rs.500/- each to the petitioner who issued allotment orders alleged to have been issued by the Town Planning Officer, Guntur Municipal Corporation with forged signatures and gave them to the said persons and further promised them that on 15.8.2000 they would be disbursed house site pattas by the Minister. As the accused failed to keep up his false promise and no such pattas were distributed, the said persons suspected that the accused might have cheated them and finally approached P.W.1 who is the Town Planning Officer, Guntur and came to know that the allotment letters are forged documents. In that connection a case in Cr.No.305 of 2000 was registered and investigated into and after completion of investigation the police filed the charge sheet. 3 The learned counsel for the petitioner fairly conceded that it is not a fit case for interference, but, however, requested this court to take a lenient view with regard to the quantum of sentence. 4 In the light of the said submissions, this court looked into the record. The petitioner was again taken into custody when the appellate court dismissed the appeal on 14.05.2004 and he was released on bail only after this revision was admitted and bail was granted by this court on 18.05.2004. From the above, it is clear that the petitioner was in jail for some period. As the alleged offence took place in 2000 and the petitioner was in jail for some period, this court is of the view that a lenient view can be taken. 5 Accordingly, the said sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment imposed on the petitioner by both the courts below for the offence punishable under section 420 of IPC is reduced to that of the period, which the petitioner had already undergone. Excepting the above modification in quantum of sentence, this revision in all other aspects shall stand cancelled. --------------- 20.01.2011 Kvsn