THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.995 OF 2004 DATED 7th DECEMBER, 2010. BETWEEN : Savalam Balaswamy .. Appellant-accused and The State of A.P. ..Respondent THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.995 OF 2004 JUDGMENT: This is an appeal arising out of the conviction and sentence imposed in Sessions Case No.274 of 2003 by the Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Vijayawada, vide judgment dated 19.03.2004, wherein the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under Section 235 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’). Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 10.06.2003 at 1200 hours accused came in front of the house of L.W.1 and abused her in an indecent language and asked her husband, who was sitting nearby panchayat bench, to see him and thereby her husband scolded him and sent him away. Then, the accused developed grouse against L.W.1, came back again in front of her house at about 1230 hours with an axe hidden on his back underneath his shirt, with ulterior motive of killing her and started abusing her. Then L.W.1, who frustrated with the incident, abuses and behaviour of the accused, came on the road and questioned him. Then, the accused pushed her down and when she fell down, he hacked her on her neck with that axe and when her husband tried to catch him, he pushed him and ran away. Basing on the statement of the injured, Police registered a case in Crime No.157 of 2003 for the offence under Section 307 IPC and after completion of entire investigation they filed charge sheet for the offence under Section 307 IPC. In order to prove the guilt of the appellants, Prosecution got examined PWs 1 to 14 and marked Exs.P1 to P.17 apart from MOs 1 to 5. When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. accused denied the incriminating circumstances read over to him, which is available in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. Accused did not choose to adduce any oral or documentary evidence on his behalf. After evaluating the entire evidence on record, the learned Sessions Judge rendered the impugned judgment. Challenging the same, present appeal is filed. Heard. After arguing for sometime, the learned counsel for the appellant confined his arguments to the extent of imposition of sentence. He submitted that the appellant is having wife and children and is the sole breadwinner of his family. Thus, he prayed to show some indulgence on the appellant in imposition of sentence. In view of the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that merits and demerits of the prosecution case and impugned judgment need not be adjudicated by this Court now. Considering the circumstances of the case and the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant, this Court is of the view that some lenience can be shown towards the appellant in imposition of sentence. Therefore, the conviction imposed by the learned Sessions Judge is hereby confirmed. However, the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the appellant is reduced to that of the period already undergone by him in prison. Fine amount imposed by the trial Court is not interfered with. Remaining portion of the impugned judgment shall stand unchanged. With above modification, the Criminal Appeal is disposed of. ________________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Dated : 07.12.2010 sur