THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1276 OF 2004 DATED 7TH JULY, 2010. BETWEEN Pilli Danial & others …Petitioner/Accused and The State of A.P. rep. by The Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad …..Respondent/Complainant. THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1276 OF 2004 ORDER: This Criminal revision case under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. arises out of the judgment dated 30-07-2004 in Criminal Appeal No.109 of 2003 passed by the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Warangal. The learned Sessions Judge by the impugned judgment confirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Jangaon, in S.C.No.84 of 2003 on 25.09.2003 wherein the learned Assistant Sessions Judge convicted all the accused except A.1 and A.2 under different charges and imposed different sentences of imprisonment on them, which was confirmed by the impugned judgment in Crl.A.No.109 of 2003 being preferred by petitioners herein. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Trial Court and the Appellate Court erred in deciding the issue that the petitioners committed offence under section 326 IPC. The prosecution has not marked any x-ray certificates or examined the doctor, who treated the injured persons and none of the injuries sustained by the injured comes under the category of section 320 of IPC to attract the ingredients of section 326 IPC. This Court also perused the entire record and admittedly there is no evidence adduced by the prosecution to prove that the offence is one under section 326 IPC. But, a perusal of the records reveals ingredients of section 324 IPC. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also stated that the petitioners can be convicted under section 324 IPC in lieu of section 326 IPC, to which, the learned counsel for the petitioners also not having any serious objection, but, however, he prayed for some leniency. In this connection, he also submitted the petitioners and the de facto complainant are related to each other and the incident took place on the spur of moment in a sudden quarrel. Admittedly, the occurrence is in the year 2003 and for all these years the petitioners suffered humiliation and also stigma in the society. In these circumstances, this Court is inclined to show some leniency against the petitioners. Accordingly, the conviction imposed by the trial Court and confirmed by the Appellate Court is hereby modified convicting the petitioners under section 324 IPC instead of 326 IPC and all petitioners are sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each in lieu of the sentence imposed under section 148 IPC, petitioners 2, 4 to 7 are directed to pay a fine of Rs.3000/- each for the offence punishable under section 324 IPC in lieu of the sentence imposed for the offence under section 326 IPC, petitioners 1 and 3 are directed to pay a fine of Rs.3000/- each for the offence punishable under section 324 IPC in lieu of sentence imposed for the offence under section 326 IPC and petitioners 1 and 3 are further directed to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each for the offence punishable under section 149 IPC and petitioners 1 and 3 are also directed to pay a fine of Rs.3000/- each in lieu of sentence imposed on them by the trial Court for the offence punishable under section 324 IPC. The fine amounts now imposed on the petitioners are in addition to the fine amounts imposed by the trial Court. The remaining portion of the impugned judgment shall stand unchanged With above modification, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. ________________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Dated : 07.07.2010 sur