THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1894 OF 2003 ORDER: 1 Petitioners herein and several others were tried by the learned II Additional Judicial I Class Magistrate, Proddatur in C.C.No.214 of 1996 for the offences punishable under sections 20(1)(c)(iii) (d)(1) r/w Sec. 29(4)(a) (1) of A.P. Forest Act. 2 During the course of trial, the prosecution pressed into service the evidence of PWs.1 to 4 and got exhibited Exs.P.1 to P.10. The trial court, having considered the entire evidence, while acquitting the accused 5 to 9 of the said offence, found the petitioners herein who are accused 1 to 3 guilty of the said offence and accordingly sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and also to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- each, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for two months each. As against the said judgment dated 11.01.2000 the petitioners herein preferred Criminal Appeal No.37 of 2000 and the learned II Additional Sessions Judge Kadapa district at Proddatur by his judgment dated 20.11.2003 dismissed the same. Hence the present revision. 3 The case of the prosecution is that on 11.7.1996 while the forest officials were patrolling the locality of Muddrereddipalli beat at 4.00 PM, they noticed four D B carts loaded with Red Sander wood pieces. One person was coming in front of the bullock cart and on seeing the forest officials accused 5 to 9 ran away and accused 1 to 4 were arrested. On interrogation, the accuse 1 to 4 stated that they have no licnce to transport the said material. Then 125 Red sander logs together with four D.B. Carts, eight bulls, axes and hammers were seized from them under a panchanama. After completion of the entire investigation the charge sheet was filed. 4 Heard both sides. 5 Having considered the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners and the having perused the judgments delivered by both the courts below, this court is of the view that the said sentence imposed on the petitioners is justified. In fact the Courts below have appreciated the entire evidence of prosecution i.e. P.Ws1 to 4 in holding that the petitioners are guilty of the said offence. In fact the same appears to be correct. 6 Accordingly I see no merits in this revision and the same is liable to be dismissed. However, as the alleged offence took place in the year 1994, and the petitioners have already served part of the imprisonment, this court is of the view that the said sentence may be reduced. 7 In the result, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. The sentence of six months imprisonment imposed by the courts below is modified and the same is reduced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months each. Excepting the said modification, in all other aspects, the revision is dismissed. The petitioners are hereby directed to be taken into custody to serve the remaining period of sentence, if any. The remand period, which they have already undergone is given set off under section 428 of Cr.P.C. --------------- Kvsn 03.03.2010