HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1582 of 2004 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is preferred by the Petitioner- Accused against judgment, dated 17.08.2004, rendered in Criminal Appeal No.115 of 2001 on the file of V Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Eluru, confirming conviction and sentence imposed in C.C.No.711 of 2000 on the file of II- Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Eluru. 2. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 (for short, ‘the accused’) was prosecuted in C.C.No.711 of 2000 for the offence punishable under Section 325 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. After due trial, the learned II-Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Eluru, convicted A-1 under Section 248 (2) Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under section 325 of I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of the fine amount to undergo Simple Imprisonment for one month vide judgment, dated 16.05.2001, whereas against the said conviction and sentence, A-1 filed the Criminal Appeal No.115 of 2001, whereby the learned V Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Eluru, on the consideration of the material available on record, confirmed the judgment of the trial court, and aggrieved by that, the petitioner-accused has preferred the present Criminal Revision Case. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the accused and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the Respondent – State. 4. The prosecution version, in brief, is that on 02.09.2000 in the morning at 7.00 a.m., the de-facto complainant, U.Nagaraju (PW.1) went to the working place of A-1 at Pangidigudem and questioned him about the disputes between him and his brother and warned him in the presence of elders and, on that, A-1 developed enmity against the family members of PW.1, and on the same day at 7.30 p.m., A1 to A4 went to the house of PW.1 and abused PW.1 and A-1 armed with a stick beat over his right hand wrist, while A2 to A-4 caught hold of him and inflicted injuries to him, and on seeing the same, PW2 and others went to PW.1 and rescued him from the hands of A-1 to A-4. 5. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner/A-1 has not pressed the main prayer and confined his arguments to the extent of reduction of sentence and requested the Court to show some indulgence in favour of the petitioner/A-1. 6. In view of the said submission and also the fact that the trial Court as well as the appellate Court gave concurrent findings against A-1 for the said offence, this Court is of the view that the merits of the prosecution case and the impugned judgment need not be adjudicated. 7. Admittedly, the offence took place in the year 2000 and for all these years, A-1 must have suffered humiliation by attending various Courts in connection with this case and lost valuable part of his life and might have also incurred lot of expenditure correspondingly. In these circumstances, this Court is inclined to show some mercy upon the petitioner/A-1. 8. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence recorded against the petitioner/A-1 by the trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 325 of I.P.C. and as confirmed by the appellate Court is further confirmed, but the sentence of imprisonment is modified and reduced to Rigorous Imprisonment of six months, while keeping the fine clause intact. The period of detention, if any, undergone by A-1 in this case shall be given set off under Section 428 of Cr.P.C. With the above noted modification, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. __________________________ G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J 29th July, 2011 v v