THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA Crl.R.C.No.331 of 2004 ORDER This revision is directed against the judgment, dated 20.02.2004, passed by the learned X Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Guntur in Crl.A.No.332 of 2003, wherein the conviction and sentence imposed against the petitioners/A1, A4 and A5 by the learned I Additional Munsif Magistrate, Repalle, in C.C.No.55 of 2002, dated 25.08.2003, was reduced. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that there were disputes between the accused and P.W.3 with regard to the marriage of A3, daughter of A1, with another person though A3 and P.W.3 loved each other and were willing to marry. Due to the said differences, on 28.05.2002 at about 9.30 PM, all the accused gathered and A1 beat P.W.3 with chetney pounder on the left and right side of his head causing bleeding injuries. When A2 and A3 caught hold of P.W.3, A4 hacked him with a knife on his left hand and left forearm. A5 beat him with a stick on his back, again A1 beat him with a stick on his right ankle and back. On the basis of the complaint given by P.W.3, a case in Cr.No.23 of 2002 was registered against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 324 read with Section 34 IPC. 3. To bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 8 and got marked Exs.P1 to P3. On behalf of defence, Exs.D1 and D2 were marked. 4. On appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found all the accused guilty of the offence under Section 324 read with Section 34 IPC and accordingly, convicted and sentenced A2 and A3 to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-each, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months each; and convicted and sentenced A1, A4 and A5 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years each and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-each, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months each. The trial Court further observed that out of the total fine amount, 75% shall be given to P.W.3 towards compensation. The said judgment was questioning by all the accused by filing Crl.A.No.332 of 2003. The learned Sessions Judge having reassessed the entire evidence dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court, but reduced the sentence from three years rigorous imprisonment to three years simple imprisonment each insofar as A1, A4 and A5 are concerned. The same is questioned by the petitioners/A1,A4 and A5 by filing the present revision. 5. Heard. 6. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the judgments impugned, this Court is of the view that the lower appellate Court had taken a lenient view and reduced the sentence of rigorous imprisonment from three years to three years simple imprisonment insofar as the petitioners are concerned and therefore, they have got the maximum relief in the lower appellate Court itself. This Court, while admitting the revision on 25.02.2004, granted bail to the petitioners. Therefore, the petitioners were in jail for a period of one week i.e., from 20.02.2004 to 26.02.2004. As the incident took place in the year 2002, this Court is of the view that a lenient view can be taken in the case of the petitioners by reducing the sentence of simple imprisonment from three years to the period already undergone by them. Insofar as the fine amount is concerned, there is no need to interfere with the same. 7. With the above observation, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. ___________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J Date:15.12.2010 sj