HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.573 OF 2005 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is preferred by the petitioner- sole accused against the judgment, dated 31.03.2005, rendered in Criminal Appeal No.128 of 2003 by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Warangal. 2. The petitioner-accused was prosecuted in S.C.No.269 of 2003 for the offence punishable under Section 304 part-II IPC. After due trial, the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Jangaon, convicted the petitioner under Section 235 (2) Cr.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part-II IPC, vide judgment, dated 24.11.2003. 3. As against the said conviction, the petitioner filed Criminal Appeal No.128 of 2003 on the file of the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Warangal and the learned Sessions Judge, having gone through both the oral and documentary evidence, partly allowed the criminal appeal by converting the section of law from 304 Part-II IPC to 325 IPC and accordingly convicting and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months, vide judgment, dated 31.03.2005. Challenging the same, the petitioner 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 appellate Court has given concurrent findings, this Court is of the view that merits of the prosecution case and impugned judgment need not be adjudicated. 7. It is represented that the petitioner is the sole bread winner of his family and has to look after the affairs of his family members and that he has suffered imprisonment for a considerable time. Admittedly, the offence took place in the year 2002 and for all these years the petitioner suffered humiliation. In these circumstances, this Court is inclined to show some lenience towards the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, the conviction recorded against the petitioner-accused by the appellate Court for the offence punishable under Section 325 IPC is confirmed and the sentence of imprisonment is modified to that of the period already undergone by the petitioner. The fine amount imposed for the said offence by the appellate Court is not interfered with. 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 23rd December, 2010 cbs HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.573 OF 2005 DATE: 23.12.2010 Between : Burra Sailu … Petitioner/ Accused and State of A.P. ..Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.573 of 2005 (Disposed of) 23rd December, 2010 cbs