HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.384 OF 2005 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is preferred by the petitioners- accused Nos.1 and 4 against the judgment, dated 26.02.2005, rendered in Criminal Appeal No.71 of 2004 by the I Addl. Sessions Judge, Guntur. 2. The petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 4 along with three other accused were prosecuted in S.C.No.325 of 2001 for the offences punishable under Sections 395 and 412 IPC. After due trial, the learned Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Guntur, convicted the petitioners under Section 235 (2) Cr.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months each for the offence punishable under Section 395 IPC while acquitting them of the offence punishable under Section 412 IPC, vide judgment, dated 03.01.2004. 3. As against the said conviction, the petitioners filed Criminal Appeal No.71 of 2004 on the file of the I Addl. Sessions Judge, Guntur and the learned Sessions Judge, having gone through both the oral and documentary evidence, dismissed the appeal while confirming the conviction and sentence recorded against the petitioners by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, vide judgment, dated 26.02.2005. Challenging the same, the petitioners preferred this revision. 4. Heard both sides. 5. After arguing for sometime, learned counsel for the petitioners 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 petitioners. 6. In view of the said submission and also the fact that the trial Court as well as the appellate Court have 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 petitioners are the bread winners of their families and have to look after the affairs of their families and that they have suffered imprisonment for more than one year. Admittedly, the offence took place in the year 1999 and for all these years the petitioners suffered humiliation. In these circumstances, this Court is inclined to show some lenience towards the petitioners. 8. Accordingly, the conviction recorded against the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 4 by the trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 395 IPC as confirmed by the appellate Court is confirmed and the sentence of imprisonment is modified to that of the period already undergone by the petitioners. The fine amount imposed for the said offence by the trial Court as confirmed 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.384 OF 2005 DATE: 23.12.2010 Between : Shaik Subhani and another … Petitioners/ Accused and State of A.P. ..Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.384 of 2005 (Disposed of) 23rd December, 2010 cbs