THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1093 OF 2003 ORDER: 1 This revision is directed against the judgment passed by the learned III Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in Crl.A.No.281 of 2002 dated 18.07.2003 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge while allowing the said appeal partly, however modified the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner by the learned IX Metropolitan Magistrate Hyderabad in C.C.No.376 of 2001 from one year to three months for the offence punishable under section 380 of IPC. 2 Facts in brief are that on 07.06.2001 the complainant Mohd. Abdul Hadi went to his sister’s house along with his family members after locking the doors and handed over the keys to his neighbour i.e. the petitioner herein. After return on the next day the complainant took the keys from the petitioner and opened the door and found the lights in the house burning. Thereafter he searched for the valuable items in his house but he could not found them. Suspecting that the petitioner might have committed theft of the gold and valuable ornaments, the complainant gave a report to the police and in that connection a case in Cr.No.150 of 2001 under section 380 of IPC was registered. During the course of investigation the stolen property was seized from the petitioner and after completion of investigation, the police filed charge sheet. 3 The trial court took the case into cognisance for the offence punishable under section 380 of IPC and having analysed the entire evidence both oral and documentary found all the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 380 of IPC and accordingly convicted and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and also to pay a fine of Rs.500/-. As against the said judgment dated 06.09.2002 passed by the trial court, the petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No. 281 of 2002 and the learned III Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, by his judgment dated 18.07.2003 allowed the said appeal in part by modifying the said sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment to that of three months. Hence the present revision. 4 Heard. 5 The appellate court pronounced the judgment on 18.07.2003 and this court granted bail to the petitioner on 01.08.2003. Thus the accused was in jail for a period of nearly fifteen days. 6 In view of the fact that the said offence is of the year 2001 and as the accused was in jail for a considerable period of two weeks, this court is of the view that the said period of detention is sufficient 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 six months rigorous imprisonment as 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