THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 783 OF 2004 DATED 16TH JUNE, 2010. BETWEEN Inti VenkataReddy and anr … petitioner/Accused and The Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad …..Respondent/Complainant. THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 783 OF 2004 ORDER: 1. This Criminal revision case under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. arises out of the judgment dated 20-04-2004 in Criminal Appeal No. 244 of 1999 passed by the learned VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Narsapur. 2. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Narsapur, by judgment dated 15.11.1999 found A-1 guilty for the oﬀence punishable under Section 307 IPC and accordingly sentenced him to undergo R.I. for seven years and to pay a ﬁne of Rs.200/-, in default, to suﬀer S.I. for three months, and, further found A-2 and A3 guilty for the oﬀence punishable under Section 307 r/w 34 IPC and accordingly sentenced them to under go R.I. for seven years each and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- each, in default to suffer S.I. for three months. However, A-1 and A-2 were found not guilty for the oﬀence punishable under Section 324 IPC and A.3 was found not guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 324 r/w 34 IPC. 3. On appeal being Crl.A.No. 244 of 1999 preferred by the accused, the lower Appellate Court partly allowed the same acquitting A-2 under Section 235(1) Cr.P.C. for the oﬀence punishable under Section 307 and ordered to return the ﬁne amount to him, if already paid, and, the conviction and sentence imposed on Accused 1 and 3 was modiﬁed and A.1 was found guilty for the oﬀence punishable under Section 324 IPC and was sentenced to suﬀer R.I. for six months maintaining the ﬁne amount, while A.3 was sentenced to suﬀer R.I. for one year for the oﬀence punishable under Section 326 IPC maintaining the ﬁne amount already imposed. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State. 3. The learned Counsel after arguing for some time, conﬁned their submissions with regard to the imposition of sentence. 4. Admittedly the occurrence took place in the year 1997 and for the last thirteen years they suﬀered humiliation and also stigma in the society. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that now they are married and they have to look after their children and they are the only breadwinner for their family members and that the committed oﬀence was without any intention. The entire occurrence took place on the spur of moment and that therefore there are entitled to some indulgence in the case of inﬂicting sentence is concerned. The learned public prosecutor is not seriously objected for the same. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and lapse of time, this Court is of the view that some lenience can be shown to the petitioners to give an opportunity to change their attitude and lead normal life. Accordingly, the conviction imposed by the lower appellate Court against the accused is conﬁrmed and, however, the sentence imposed by it is set aside. The petitioners are directed to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- each apart from ﬁne amount imposed by the lower appellate Court. The petitioners are directed to pay the amount ordered by this Court within six months from the date of copy of this order is made ready. 7. The Criminal Revision Case is accordingly disposed of. --------------------------- -- JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO DATED 16-06-2010. Msnr.