THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2443 of 2010 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the judgment, dated 15.12.2010, passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Warangal in Crl.A.No.231 of 2010, wherein and whereby the judgment, dated 16.11.2010, passed in C.C.No.247 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Warangal, convicting and sentencing the petitioner- accused No.2 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of nine months for the offence punishable under Section 379 IPC was confirmed. The succinct facts of the prosecution case are that the on 05.12.2005, at about 11 am., P.W-1 withdrew a sum of Rs.20,000/- from Canara Bank, Balasamudram, Hanamkonda, and kept it in his hand bag and boarded an auto; that after a few minutes, one person boarded it along with a child and sat towards his left side and another person boarded it along with another small female baby and sat in the front seat of the auto; that he got down from the auto at Warangal bus stand and boarded a bus bound for Thorrur; and that he got down at Thorrur bus stand, where he observed that his bag was cut and Rs.20,000/- was stolen away. Hence, suspecting the complicity of those two strangers, who boarded the auto, as the suspects, P.W-1 lodged a complaint and on the basis of it, a case was registered for the offence punishable under Section 379 IPC. Further, during the course of investigation, on 10.12.2005, while the petitioner herein-A-2 and another person-A-1 were found moving under suspicious circumstances, they were apprehended and on interrogation, they voluntarily confessed to have committed the said offence, as per which, the currency notes, sealed with a wrapper on which Canara Bank, Hanamkonda, Warangal was printed, were seized from them and later, in the test identification parade conducted on 21.01.2006, P.W-1 identified the said property as that of his and thus, the charge sheet was laid against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 379 IPC. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the material papers on record. When the matter is taken up, learned counsel for the petitioner-accused 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 about one and half months. 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 15.02.2010 and immediately, the petitioner was taken into custody, and as on today, the petitioner suffered a sentence of about 40 days. In those circumstances, as the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the accused by both the Courts below is only nine 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 Criminal Revision Case is disposed of, at the stage of admission, and the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of nine 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. ___________________________________ JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA 25th January 2011 dr