HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRL.R.C.No.505 of 2011 JUDGMENT: This criminal revision case is directed against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Anantapur, in Crl.A.No.85 of 2010, dated 27.12.2010, whereby, the learned Judge, while setting aside the conviction and sentence of three years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.2,000/- imposed against the 1st petitioner-A2 for the offence punishable under Section 326 read with section 34 of I.P.C., confirmed the conviction and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, simple imprisonment for a period of three months, for the offence punishable under Section 324 read with Section 34 of I.P.C, imposed against the 1st petitioner-A2 and also the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each and fine of Rs.2,000/- each, in default, simple imprisonment for a period of three months each imposed against the 2nd and 3rd petioners-A3 and A-4, for the offence punishable under Section 324 read with Section 34 of I.P.C, by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Special Mobile Court, Anantapur, in C.C.No.197 of 2007 dated 10.06.2010. The brief facts of the case are that there are ill-feelings between the accused and P.W.1 with regard to lands since about five years. On 17.07.2005 at about 6 P.M. while P.Ws.1 and 2 were coming to their houses on their vehicles, the accused attacked them and that A-2 hacked P.W.1 with an axe on his head twice and caused bleeding injuries; A-3 and A-4 beat him with reverse side of axes on his both legs and caused bleeding injury to his left ankle and contusion on right foot. It is further stated that when P.W.2 intervened to rescue P.W.1, A-3 hacked him with an axe on his head and caused bleeding injury and that all the accused beat P.Ws.1 and 2 with reverse side axes indiscriminately and caused injuries to them. Thereafter, P.W.7 recorded the statement of P.W.1 at the hospital and P.W.8 registered a case in Crime No.52 of 2005 under Sections 324 and 326 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and after completion of investigation, P.W.9 filed charge sheet against the accused and that the accused were tried for the said offences. The prosecution has examined P.Ws.1 to 9 and got marked Exs.P1 and P8 to prove the guilt of the accused. On a perusal of the entire evidence, both oral and documentary, the trial Court, found the accused guilty of the offences with which they were charged and accordingly convicted and sentenced them as stated supra. In an appeal preferred by the accused against the said conviction and sentence, the learned Sessions Judge, Anantapur, dismissed the appeal with the above modification. Aggrieved by the same, the revision petitioners-A2, A3 and A4 preferred this criminal revision. Heard both sides. Learned Counsel for the revision petitioners fairly conceded that this is not a fit case to interfere with the findings recorded by the appellate Court, but, however, he requested this Court to take a lenient view in so far as the sentence of imprisonment is concerned. On perusal of the entire evidence on record, this Court is of the view that the appellate Court has given sufficient and cogent reasons in convicting the revision petitioners. Therefore, no interference is warranted as far as conviction is concerned, but with regard to the quantum of sentence, it is clear from the record that the petitioners-A2, A3 and A4 were in judicial custody from 27.07.2005 to 06.08.2005 and again from 03.03.2011 to 07.03.2011. So it is clear from the record that the revision petitioners are in jail for a period of more than two weeks. In the aforesaid circumstances and having regard to the fact that the alleged offence took place in the year 2005, this Court is of the view that a lenient view can be taken by reducing the sentence of imprisonment imposed against the revision petitioners-A2, A3 and A4 to that of the period already undergone by them. The sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of One year imposed against the revision petitioners-A2, A3 and A4 for the offence punishable under Section 324 read with Section 34 of I.P.C., by the appellate Court in Crl.A.No.85 of 2010 vide its judgment dated 27.12.2010, is reduced to that of the period, which the petitioners- A2, A3 and A4 have already undergone, while maintaining the sentence of fine imposed against them. The petitioners-A2, A3 and A4 are directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other crime. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed with the above said modification. _______________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 07-03-2011 Gsn.