HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO CRL.R.C.No.247 of 2009 Date: 11th November, 2011 Between: 1.Dhal Shiva @ Shiva, S/o D.Lalachandra 23 years, Student, R/o Plot No.125, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad and 3 others ..Petitionersappellants-accused And State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. ..Respondent-Complainant-Respondent HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO CRL.R.C.No.247 of 2009 ORDER: This criminal revision case is filed against the judgment of the learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge, City Criminal Courts, Hyderabad, in Crl.A.No.204 of 2008 dated 11.02.2009 confirming the conviction and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and fine of Rs.200/-each, in default, simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence under Section 353 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. imposed against the revision petitioners-accused by the learned XIV-Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, in C.C.No.184 of 2006 dated 01.07.2008. It is the case of the prosecution that on 26.08.2005 at about 1 P.M. P.W.1 was on duty at Yashoda hospital, Somajiguda, as Home-guard under the direct supervision of P.W.2-Inspector of Traffic Flying Squad and that he noticed the accused riding on Samurai motor vehicle and when he stopped the vehicle, A-2 pushed P.W.1 aside and also caught hold of his neck and that A- 1, A-3 and A-4 abused P.W.1 in filthy language for stopping their vehicle and in that process P.W.1’s nameplate was broken. Thereafter, P.W.2 caught hold of the accused and informed the same to the concerned police. On a complaint given by P.W.1 to police, a case in Crime No.879 of 2005 was registered and investigated into and the accused were charged for the offence under Section 353 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. During trial, on behalf of prosecution, P.Ws.1 to 4 were examined and marked Exs.P1 and P2. After considering the evidence on record, the trial Court convicted the accused for the offence under Section 353 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.200/-, in default, simple imprisonment for a period of one month. Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the accused preferred Crl.A.No.204 of 2008 and the learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court against the revision petitioners-accused. Questioning the said judgment dated 11.02.2009, the present revision is filed by the accused. The point that arises for consideration is whether the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court as confirmed by the appellate Court is legal and sustainable? POINT:: With regard to the nature of the incident is concerned, P.W.1, who is the victim and Home-guard on duty at the scene of offence, has specifically stated about the acts of the accused and the fact that the accused were apprehended and were taken to the police station from the scene of offence is also proved by the evidence of P.W.2. Therefore, the tussle with P.W.1, who was on duty, and the incident in which he was attacked cannot be doubted. However, the learned Counsel for the revision petitioners contends that the accused persons are students and the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months will damage their future career and therefore, a lenient view may be taken. Taking into consideration of the above plea and the nature of the incident and in view of the fact that the revision petitioners- accused were in jail for a period of one week, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence under Section 353 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. imposed against the revision petitioners-accused by the Courts below, is set aside. However, the revision petitioners-accused are directed to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand) more each, apart from the fine amount of Rs.200/- each imposed by the Courts below, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence under Section 353 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision case is partly allowed. __________________________________ JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO 11-11-2011 Gsn.