THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2097 of 2004 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the judgment dated 24.11.2004 made in Crl.A.No.16 of 2004 by the Principal Sessions Judge, Rangareddy District, L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad. The case of the prosecution is as follows: P.W.1-M. Anand, who is closely related to the accused, is injured. P.W.3-M. Anant Yadav is his brother and P.W.2-M. Anji Yadav is the person, who gave complaint and P.W.4-B. Swamy is the eye witness. On 19.9.2002 when P.W.1 was sitting near Vigneshwar idol at Vinayaknagar the accused came from his back side and stabbed him from his behind on his left side of spinal card and P.W.1 was completely immobilized from his waist and legs and fell down. Then, the accused caught hold of him and started cutting his lip below, left nostril, right side of nose and right side of neck. When the people gathered, the accused ran away. P.W.1 was shifted to the hospital by his brother P.W.3 and wife. P.W.2 gave a report. On the basis of the said report, P.W.5-K. Srinath Reddy registered the same as a case in Crime No.235 of 2002. After completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was filed and the learned Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Hyderabad, East and North, Rangareddy District, took cognizance of the same for the offence under Section 307 IPC and numbered it as P.R.C.No.186 of 2002. After following the due procedure as contemplated under the provisions of Cr.P.C., the learned Magistrate committed the same to the Court of Sessions and the learned Sessions Judge numbered the case as S.C.No.12 of 2003 and made over the same to the Court of III Additional Assistant Sessions Judge (FTC), Rangareddy District, for disposal. On appreciation of both oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found the petitioner-accused guilty of the offence under section 307 IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo S.I. for six months. Challenging the said judgment, the petitioner-accused preferred an appeal in Crl.A.No.16 of 2004 before the Principal Sessions Judge, Rangareddy District, L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad. The learned Sessions Judge confirmed the judgment of the Court below. Questioning the said judgment, the petitioner-accused filed the present revision. Sri C. Praveen Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner- accused submitted that the doctor, who examined the injured at Gandhi Hospital was not examined and as such, an adverse inference should have been drawn by the Courts below and further, there is absolutely no evidence with regard to the alleged treatment of the victim at Gandhi Hospital and the entire case is fabricated and therefore, the judgment of the Courts below are liable to be set aside. In the light of the above submission, this Court looked into the record. There are discrepancies in the testimonies of P.Ws.1 to 4. But in my considered view, the said discrepancies do not go to the root of the case to say that the entire case is fabricated. It is true that the doctor, who treated the injured at Gandhi Hospital was not examined and there is no documentary evidence to establish the alleged treatment. But the injured, who was examined as P.W.1, he categorically stated about the alleged incident and the same is supported by the evidence of P.Ws.3 and 4. When there is so much of evidence with regard to the alleged incident, in my considered view, the non-examination of the doctor cannot be said to be fatal to the case of the prosecution. Therefore, I see no merits in this revision. However, as the alleged offence took place on 19.9.2002 i.e., about 10 years back, this Court is of the view that a lenient view can be taken insofar as the sentence of imprisonment is concerned. Accordingly, the conviction imposed on the petitioner-accused for the offence under Section 307 IPC is confirmed, but the said sentence of 7 years imposed by the Court below is reduced to two years. In the result, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years imposed by the Courts below against the petitioner- accused for the offence under section 307 IPC is reduced to rigorous imprisonment for two years, while maintaining the sentence of fine. The petitioner is directed to serve the remaining sentence of imprisonment. Except to the above modification, in all other aspects, the revision is dismissed. _______________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 31st March, 2011 Nn THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2097 of 2004 31.3.2011