THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1114 of 2011 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the judgment, dated 15.03.2011, made by the Principal Sessions Judge, Khammam, in Crl.A.No.23 of 2010 modifying the judgment dated 22.1.2010 passed by the I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam, in C.C.No.276 of 2007. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: The petitioner-accused married injured-P.W.2 about 15 years back and they were blessed with two children. About one year back, the appellant-accused shifted his family to Ramanagutta, Khammam and is living there. For the few years, the accused addicted to liquor and used to harass his wife-P.W.2 both physically and mentally by suspecting her character. Several times, P.W.1-brother of P.W.2 and the parents requested the accused not harass P.W.2, but he did not heed their request and continued the harassment. While so, on 11.8.2006, the accused went to the house in late hours and as usually he picked up a quarrel with P.W.2 by insulting her modesty and attributing illegal contacts with others, picked up a stick and beat her indiscriminately over both legs and hands and caused grievous injuries. On the basis of the report given by P.W.1, a case in Crime No.147 of 2006 was registered against the petitioner-accused. After completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was filed and the same was taken cognizance as C.C.No.276 of 2007 for the offences punishable under sections 325 and 498-A IPC. On appreciation of both oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found the petitioner-accused guilty for the offences under Sections 325 and 498-A IPC and accordingly, sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years each and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to suffer S.I. for one month for each the offence under Section 325 IPC and 498-A IPC. The said judgment was questioned by way of filing an appeal in Crl.A.No.23 of 2010 before the Principal Sessions Judge, Khammam. The learned Sessions Judge allowed the appeal in part confirming the conviction of the accused for the offence under Sections 325 and 498-A IPC and reducing the sentence of simple imprisonment from two years to one year for each offence and also maintaining the sentence of fine as imposed by the trial Court. Questioning the said judgment, the petitioner filed the present revision. Learned Counsel for the petitioner-accused fairly conceded that this is not a fit case for interference, but he requested to take a lenient view insofar as the sentence of imprisonment is concerned, having regard to the fact that the petitioner has been in jail for a period of nearly 80 days. Heard and perused the material available on record. From the record, it appears that the petitioner was in jail for a period of 70 days during the course of trial and again he has been in jail from 15th March, 2011. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the nature of the offence committed by the petitioner- accused, I feel that the judgment of the appellate Court does not warrant any interference. But however, having regard to the fact that the petitioner has undergone the imprisonment for a period of yearly 80 days, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case where a lenient view can be taken insofar as the sentence of imprisonment is concerned. Accordingly, the sentence imposed by the lower appellate Court for the offence under Sections 325 and 498-A IPC against the petitioner- accused is reduced to the period already undergone. In the result, the sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of one year for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 325 IPC each against the petitioner herein viz., Annepogu Prabhakar by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Khammam, in Crl.A.No.23 of 2010 by judgment dated 15.3.2011 is reduced to that of the period, which the petitioner has already undergone, while maintaining the sentence of fine amount imposed under the above two counts. The petitioner is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other crime. With the above modification, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. _______________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 21st March, 2011 Nn THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1114 of 2011 21.3.2011