THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.371 of 2011 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the judgment, dated 06.01.2011, passed by the V Additional Sessions Judge, (III Fast Track Court), Nalgonda at Miryalguda in Crl.A.No.14 of 2010, wherein and whereby the judgment, dated 19.01.2010, passed in C.C.No.1425 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Miryalguda, convicting and sentencing the petitioner-accused No.2 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 379 IPC was confirmed. The succinct facts of the prosecution case are that the on 15.08.2009, at about 11.30 am., P.W-1 gave a report stating that on 13.08.2008, he along with Thanda people went to graze their cattle near to hillock and as their cattle did not return, they searched for it and when they reached near Dayyalagandi, they noticed some persons loading the cattle in a lorry bearing No.AP-16-U-8292 and when questioned about the said act, they fled away from the spot. On enquiry, the driver and the cleaner of the lorry informed that the said persons engaged them to shift the cattle from Dayyalagandi to Munugode. Basing on the said report, the crime was registered and that during the course of investigation, accused Nos.1 and 2 were apprehended and after completion of investigation, the charge sheet was laid against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 379 IPC. During the course of trial, on behalf of the prosecution, P.Ws.1 to 12 were examined and Exs.P-1 to P-11 were marked. On behalf of defence, none was examined and Exs.D- 1 and D-2 were marked. The trial Court after analyzing the entire evidence on record, found the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 379 IPC and accordingly, convicted and sentenced the petitioner herein-A-2 and A-2, as stated supra, which was confirmed in the appeal. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the material papers on record. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.2 fairly conceded that this is not a fit case for interference, but, however, requested this Court to take a lenient view having regard to the fact that the petitioner has been in jail for the past about one month. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and also on perusal of the material on record, it is evident that the impugned judgment was pronounced on 06.01.2011 and immediately, the petitioner was taken into custody, and as on today, the petitioner suffered a sentence of about 25 days. In those circumstances, as the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the accused by both the Courts below is only six months and the petitioner had already suffered the sentence for quite some period, this Court is of the view that a lenient view can be taken. Accordingly, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of six months for the offence punishable under section 379 IPC imposed on the petitioner-accused No.2 by both the Courts below is reduced to that of the period already undergone by him, while maintaining the sentence of fine. Except the said modification in the sentence of imprisonment, in all other aspects, this Criminal Revision Case stands dismissed. As the petitioner is in jail, the Office is hereby directed to send a copy of this order to the jail authorities and the jail authorities shall release the petitioner forthwith, if he is not required in connection with any other crime. ___________________________________ JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA 31st January 2011 DR