THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.959 OF 2004 ORDER: 1 The petitioner herein and another were tried by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge in S.C.No.347 of 1997 for the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 10 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.7 and M.O.1. On behalf of the defence though no oral evidence was adduced, Exs.D.1 to D.3 were marked. The trial court having analysed the said evidence came to the conclusion that though the accused are not guilty of the offence punishable under section 307 of IPC, however, found them guilty of the offence punishable under section 326 of IPC and accordingly convicted and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of two months each. Questioning the said judgment dated 19.05.1998 the petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No.45 of 1998 and the learned IV Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) Ongole by his judgment dated 31.05.2004 while holding that the second accused in the said case has not committed any offence and acquitted him, however, altered the conviction of the petitioner herein from 326 to 324 of IPC and accordingly sentenced him to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one year. Hence this revision. 2 The case of the prosecution in brief is that the de facto complainant i.e. Sk. Khadar Basha married the sister of the accused. Some altercation took place on 10.05.1997 at about 1.00 PM between the de facto complainant and his wife. During such altercation the accused and their father came to the house of the de facto complainant and beat him. The de facto complainant sent one Nadendla Srinivasarao (P.W.2) to his brother to inform about the same. At about 5.00 PM on 10.05.1997 while P.W.2 and P.W.3 were coming to the house of the accused, the accused fell on P.W.2. On hearing the said galata the de facto complainant came to her father- in-law’s house to enquire. While so the petitioner beat the de facto complainant with a knife on his left rib and right index finger causing bleeding injuries. The second accused beat the de facto complainant with a stick on fore head. When PW.3 intervened to rescue his brother the petitioner stabbed him with knife on stomach and right thigh causing bleeding injuries. In that connection a case in Cr.No.19 of 1997 was registered for the offences punishable under sections 324, 326 and 307 r/w 34 of IPC and after completion of investigation the police filed the charge sheet and after committal the same was numbered as S.C.No.347 of 1997. 3 Heard. 4 The learned counsel for the petitioner fairly conceded that this is not a fit case for interference, but however, requested the court to take a lenient view in so far as the said sentence is concerned. He further submitted that the petitioner is in jail for a period of more than 40 days. 5 In the light of the said submission this court looked into the record. The petitioner was taken into custody on 22.05.1997 and he was released on bail on 12.06.1997. Thus he was in jail for a period of 20 days. Further, the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed on 31.05.2004 and immediately the petitioner was taken into custody and it is only after admission of this revision and granting of bail by this court on 18.06.2004, the petitioner came out of the jail. From the above, it is clear that the petitioner was in jail for a period of nearly 20 days. As the said sentence imposed by the court below is only imprisonment for one year, and as the petitioner was in jail for about 40 days and inasmuch as the offence relates to the year 1997 this court takes a lenient view. 6 Accordingly, the said sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of one year imposed on the petitioner by the court below is reduced to that of the period, which the petitioner had already undergone. Excepting the above modification, in all other aspects this revision is dismissed. -------------- 18.11.2010 Kvsn