THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1572 of 2010 ORDER: The appellant is Accused No.1 in S.C.No.97 of 2007 on the file of the learned Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad, taken on file for the offences punishable under Sections 394 and 396 of I.P.C. The trial Court, having considered the evidence, came to the conclusion that the appellant and other accused are guilty of the offences with which they were charged and, accordingly, by its judgment dated 12.11.2007, sentenced them to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of ten years under each head and to pay a fine amount of Rs.100/- under each head, in default, to suffer Simple Imprisonment for a period of two months each. Challenging the said judgment, the appellant/Accused No.1 filed Criminal Appeal No.829 of 2009, whereas the other accused filed three other criminal appeals, and all these four criminal appeals were listed before this Court on 09.11.2010. On that day i.e., on 09.11.2010, the learned counsel appearing for the accused in all those appeals fairly conceded that there were no merits, but however requested to take lenient view insofar as sentence is concerned, therefore, this Court, in the light of the said submissions, reduced the sentence of Rigorous Imprisonment of 10 years imposed by the trial Court to 7 ½ years, by its common judgment dated 09.11.2010. Suppressing this fact, the appellant/Accused No.1 again filed this Criminal Appeal with a petition to condone the delay and this Court was pleased to condone the delay on 16.12.2010 and admitted the appeal, but however taking into consideration of the fact that the appellant was in jail for the last 5 ½ years from the date of his arrest, refused to grant bail and directed the office to post the appeal for final hearing immediately after Summer Vacation, 2011. Today, the matter has come up under the caption “for orders of the Court” with the following office note: “It is respectfully submitted that accused No.1 viz., Ganesh Bapu Rao Kale @ Jaipul in S.C.No. 97 of 2007 has filed Crl.A.No. 829 of 2008 challenging the Judgment dated 12.11.2007 in S.C.No. 97/2007 on the file of Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad and the same was disposed of by your Lordship in a common judgment delivered on 9.11.2010, in Crl.A.Nos.577/2008, 829/2008, 845/2009 and 333/2010 dismissing all the appeals. It is respectfully submitted that the same Accused No.1 again preferred Criminal Appeal No.1572/2010 against the same Judgment dated 12.11.2007 in SC No. 97 of 2007 on the file of the Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad, NTR Nagar, Hyderabad through the counsel Sri Praveen Kumar Veerjala and suppressed the fact that he has already preferred Crl.A.No.829/2008 earlier and the same was dismissed on 9/11/10 by this Hon’ble Court. The present Crl.A.No.1572/2010 which was preferred second time was admitted on 16/12/10 and is pending. It is respectfully submitted that now the counsel for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1572/2010 has obtained Court slip for posting the matter on 29.1.2011.” Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not know about the appellant filing Criminal Appeal No.829 of 2008 on earlier occasion and obtaining judgment in that appeal. May be it is true that the counsel may not know about the appellant approaching this Court and filing Criminal Appeal No.829 of 2008 on earlier occasion, but it all happened within the knowledge of the appellant viz., Ganesh Bapu Rao Pawar Kale @ Jaipul s/o. Bapu Rao Pawar. After pronouncement of judgment by this Court in Criminal Appeal No.829 of 2008, if the appellant feels aggrieved by the said judgment, the remedy available to him is to approach the Supreme Court, but not to file another Criminal Appeal before this Court by suppressing the fact of filing earlier Criminal Appeal. This is definitely abuse of process of Court and wasting of the precious time of the Court. In view of the above, this Criminal Appeal is dismissed and the appellant is hereby directed to pay costs of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) to the State Legal Services Authority within a period of eight weeks from today. In the event of his failure to pay the said costs, he shall undergo a further sentence of Simple Imprisonment of six months. Accordingly, the office note is answered and the Criminal Appeal is dismissed. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA,J 29.01.2011 v v