THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1382 OF 2002 ORDER: 1 This revision is directed against the judgment passed by the learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Khammam in Crl.A.No.91 of 2002 dated 21.09.2002 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge while dismissing the said appeal modified the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner by the learned Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Madhira, Khamma District in C.C.No.518 of 1995 for the offence punishable under section 324 r/w 34 of IPC. 2 Facts in brief are that the on 16.11.1995 at about 6.00 A.M., when L.W.1 Vangoori China Nageswara Rao was preparing bore well pipes to wet his land the accused 1 to 3 came there and objected for it and in an altercation that took place at that time, the accuse bet Nageswararao with a stick on his head. When L.W.3 Vangoori Prameela went in rescue of China Nageswararao, the accused bet her also with a para and caused her injuries. In that connection a case in Cr.No.72 of 1995 was registered for the offences punishable under section 324 r/w 34 of IPC and investigated into and after investigation the police filed the charge sheet against the accused 1 to 3 for the alleged offence. 3 The trial court, after analysing the entire evidence both oral and documentary found the third accused not guilty and accordingly acquitted of the said offence, but found the accused 2 and 3 guilty of the offence punishable under Section 324 r/w 34 of IPC. However taking a lenient view, the trial court released the second accused under section 3 of Probation of Offenders Act after duly admonishing him and ultimately convicted the first accused of the said offence and sentenced him to suffer simple imprisonment for one year and also to pay a fine of Rs.200/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. Aggrieved by the said judgment dated 12.03.1999 passed by the trial court the first accused preferred Criminal Appeal No.91 of 2002 and the learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Khamma vide his judgment dated 21.09.2002 while dismissing the said appeal modified the said sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year to that of three months. Questioning the same, the first accused preferred this revision. 4 Heard. 5 The appeal was dismissed on 21.09.2002 and this court granted bail on 27.09.2002. Thus the accused was in jail for a period of eight days. 6 In view of the fact that the said offence is of the year 1995 and as the accused was made roaming form one court to another for all these years, and since the accused was in jail for about eight days, this court is of the view that trauma which the accused has suffered all these years itself is a sufficient punishment for the offence committed by him. 7 Hence, in order to meet the ends of justice, this court, without going into the merits of the case, holds that the said sentence of three months simple imprisonment imposed by the appellate court can be reduced to that of the period, which the petitioner had already undergone. 8 Excepting the above modification, this revision, in all other aspects, is dismissed. --------------- Kvsn 15.07.2010