THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALAKRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1705 of 2010 DATED: 27-09-2010 ORDER: This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner questioning the Judgment, dated 09-09-2010, in Crl.A.No.84 of 2010 on the file of the learned V Additional Sessions Judge (II-FTC), Warangal, modifying the judgment, dated 19-02-2009, in S.C.No.237 of 2008 passed by the learned II Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Warangal. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the marriage of the daughter of P.W.1-Munigala Anitha ( hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) was performed with the petitioner about eight months prior to the date of the report. Ever since then, petitioner was harassing the deceased and the parents of the deceased i.e., P.W.1 and his wife were consoling her. When the deceased was carrying third month pregnancy, petitioner advised her to go for medical termination of the pregnancy, however she refused and unable to bear the harassment made by all the accused she committed suicide by jumping into a tank on 17-11-2007. 3. In the light of the said suicide, the father of the deceased i.e., P.W.1 approached the Sub-Inspector of police, Ghanpur and gave a report on 18-11-2007, and the Sub-Inspector of Police in turn registered a case in Cr.No.198 of 2007 against the petitioner herein for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC. After committal, it was numbered as S.C.No.237 of 2008 before the learned II Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Warangal. 4. During the course of trial, P.Ws.1 to 10 were examined and Exs.P1 to P6 were marked on behalf of the prosecution. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the defence. 5. Having analyzed the said evidence, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the petitioner is guilty on both counts and accordingly sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and also to pay fine of Rs.300/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC and further sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and also to pay fine of Rs.600/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC. Aggrieved thereby, Crl.A.No.84 of 2010 was filed on the file of the learned V Additional Sessions Judge (II-FTC), Warangal, and the learned Sessions Judge, while holding that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC set aside the judgment and sentence imposed by the trial Court, insofar as the said offence is concerned, however found the petitioner guilty of the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC and accordingly, dismissed the said appeal insofar as the said charge is concerned. The same is questioned in this revision. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly conceded that it is not a fit case for interference, however requested this Court to take a lenient view having regard to the fact that the petitioner was in jail for a period of more than three months. 7. In the light of the said submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court directed the learned counsel for the petitioner to establish the fact that the petitioner was in jail for a period of more than three months. As per the documents produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, petitioner was arrested on 30-11-2007 and immediately he was remanded to judicial custody and thereafter he was released on bail on 28-01-2008. Thereafter, as he was not attending the Court, non-bailable warrant was issued. Pursuant thereto, petitioner was again arrested on 15-04-2010 and released on bail on 26-04-2010. After dismissal of the appeal, petitioner was taken into custody on 07-09-2010 and as on date, he is in jail. 8. From the above, it is clear that the petitioner is in jail for a period of 91 days. As the offence for which he was convicted by the Courts below is punishable under Section 498-A IPC and the sentence of imprisonment imposed by the Courts below is only one year and as the petitioner had undergone a sentence of more than three months, this Court is of the view that the ends of justice would be met if the said sentence of one year is reduced to that of the period already undergone by him. 9. Accordingly, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of one year imposed against the petitioner–Munigala Shankar, S/o Late Pochaiah by the learned II Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Warangal in S.C.No.237 of 2008, and confirmed by the learned V Additional Sessions Judge (II-FTC), Warangal in Criminal Appeal No.84 of 2010, for the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC, is reduced to that of the period already undergone by him. Petitioner is directed to be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any other crime. 10. Except the above modification in all other aspects the revision is dismissed. ________________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 27th September, 2010. Tsy