HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1289 OF 2005 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is preferred by the petitioner- accused No.1 against the judgment, dated 03.08.2005, rendered in Criminal Appeal No.79 of 2004 by the Chairman, MACT-cum-II Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Adilabad. 2. The petitioner-accused along with accused No.2 was prosecuted in C.C.No.110 of 2003 for the offence punishable under Section 34(a) of the A.P. Excise Act, 1968. After due trial, the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Excise, Adilabad, convicted the petitioner-A.1 under Section 248 (2) Cr.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months while acquitting A.2 of the said offence, vide judgment, dated 08.10.2004. 3. As against the said conviction, the petitioner-A.1 filed Criminal Appeal No.79 of 2004 on the file of the Chairman,MACT-cum-II Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Adilabad, and the learned Sessions Judge, after re- appreciation of both the oral and documentary evidence, dismissed the Criminal Appeal while confirming the conviction and sentence recorded against the petitioner-A.1 by the learned Magistrate, vide judgment, dated 03.08.2005. Challenging the same, the petitioner-A.1 preferred this revision. 4. Heard both sides. 5. After arguing for sometime, learned counsel for the petitioner by not pressing the main prayer confined his arguments to the extent of imposition of sentence and requested the Court to show some indulgence on the petitioner. 6. In view of the said submission and also the fact that the trial Court as well as the appellate Court have given concurrent findings, this Court is of the view that the merits and demerits of the prosecution case and the impugned judgment need not be adjudicated. 7. It is represented that the petitioner has to look after his two daughters, two sisters and aged parents. Admittedly, the offence took place in the year 2001 and for all these years the petitioner suffered humiliation. In these circumstances and also considering the family background of the petitioner, this Court is inclined to show some lenience towards the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, the conviction recorded against the petitioner-accused No.1 by the trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 34(a) of the A.P. Excise Act, 1968 as confirmed by the appellate Court is confirmed and the sentence of imprisonment is modified to that of the period already undergone by the petitioner-accused No.1. Besides the fine of Rs.10,000/- imposed by the trial Court, the petitioner is directed to pay additional fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) before the trial Court within two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months. 9. In all other respects, the impugned judgment shall stand confirmed. 10. With the above modification, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. _________________ RAJA ELANGO, J 27th January, 2011 cbs HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1289 OF 2005 DATE: 27.01.2011 Between : Boune Vasanth … Petitioner/ Accused No.1 and State of A.P. ..Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1289 of 2005 (Disposed of) 27th January, 2011 cbs