HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.751 OF 2004 Date: 19-07-2011 Between: T. Ramana. - - - Petitioner/ Appellant/ Accused. Versus The State of A.P., Rep. By its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. - - - Respondent. This Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.751 OF 2004 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is preferred by the Petitioner- Accused against judgment, dated 04-08-2003, rendered in Criminal Appeal No.7 of 2002 on the file of VI Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC), Tirupati, Chittoor District confirming conviction and sentence imposed in Sessions Case No.139 of 2000 on the file of Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Tirupati. 2. The Petitioner/Accused (for short, ‘the accused’) was prosecuted in Sessions Case No.139 of 2000 for the offence punishable under Sections 376 read with Section 511 of I.P.C. After due trial, the learned Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Tirupati, Chittoor District convicted the Accused under Section 235 (2) Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under section 354 of I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of five years and also to pay a fine of Rs.50/- and in default of payment of the fine amount to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for two weeks vide judgment, dated 19-03-2001, whereas against the said conviction and sentence, the accused filed the Criminal Appeal No.7 of 2002 on the file of learned VI Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC), Tirupati, Chittoor District which was dismissed and challenging the same, the accused has preferred this Revision. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the accused and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the Respondent – State. 4. The prosecution version in brief is that the de-facto complainant, T. Eswaramma (PW.1) is a resident of Maddinayanipalli village of B. Kothakota Mandal and living by attending coolie works and on 06-01-2000 she along with her husband Hanumanthu and her villagers i.e. Reddamma (PW.4), Rathnamma and Chandra (PW.5) went to Tirupati in search of coolie works and on 09-01-2000 at 08-30 a.m. when herself, Rathnamma and PWs. 4 and 5 were at 4 pillars mandapam situated at Gandhi road, Tirupati the accused met them and stated that he required 3 ladies and a male person to attend certain labour work at some distance and instructed Rathnamma and PWs. 4 and 5 to go over to Rayalacheruvu railway gate and took PW.1 by his cycle on the pretext of preparing sand and cleaning at some distance and ultimately took her into bushes with an intention to commit rape on her and when she started running he chased her and then she saw PWs. 2 and 3 near Subbanna quarters pittaganipalli, she raised cries and informed them about the incident and those two persons chased the accused and caught hold of the accused and beat him with hands and produced before H.R. Palli P.S. 5. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the accused has not pressed the main prayer and confined his arguments to the extent of reduction of sentence and requested the Court to show some indulgence in favour of the accused. 6. In view of the said submission and also the fact that the trial Court as well as the appellate Court gave concurrent findings against the accused for the said offence, this Court is of the view that the merits of the prosecution case and the impugned judgment need not be adjudicated. 7. Admittedly, the offence took place in the year 2000 and for all these years the accused must have suffered humiliation by attending various Courts in connection with this case and lost valuable part of his life and might have also incurred lot of expenditure correspondingly. In these circumstances, this Court is inclined to show some mercy upon the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence recorded against the Accused by the trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 354 of I.P.C. as confirmed by the appellate Court is further confirmed but the sentence of imprisonment is modified and reduced to Rigorous Imprisonment of two (2) years. The period of detention, if any, undergone by the accused in this case shall be given set off under Section 428 of Cr.P.C.. With the above noted modification, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. __________________________ G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J 19h July, 2011. Dsh THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY 144 CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.751 OF 2004 July, 19, 2011 DSH