THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRL.R.C.No.152 of 2004 ORDER: This revision is directed against the judgment, dated 02.01.2004, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nellore, in Crl.A.No.102 of 2002, wherein the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kota, in C.C.No.175 of 2001, dated 17.06.2002, was confirmed. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 25.06.1993 at 6.30 PM, on information, the Excise Officials went to the house of the petitioner/accused and searched the house in the presence of mediators and the accused and found three bags of arrack sachets. When they opened the said bags, 250 arrack sachets each in two bags and 131 sachets in third bag were found. Each bag contained printed matter as ‘Andhra Pradesh Prabhutva Varuni Vahini, 90 ml., Chittoor District with elephant mark. By that time, the Government prohibited consumption of arrack in Nellore District. After taking samples from each bag, a mediators’ report was drafted. After completion of the investigation and on receipt of the report from the analyst opining that the same contained diluted arrack, charge sheet was filed against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 34(a) of Andhra Pradesh Excise Act. 3. To bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 3 and got exhibited Exs.P1 to Ex.P9 and M.O.1 is also marked. 4. Having analyzed the said evidence, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the petitioner is found guilty of the offence with which he was charged and accordingly, sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. The same was questioned by the petitioner by filing Crl.A.No.102 of 2002 and the learned Sessions Judge, Nellore, vide judgment dated 02.01.2004, dismissed the said appeal. Hence, this revision. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that though this is not a fit case to acquit the petitioner, but a lenient view may be taken in his case. 6. From a perusal of the material on record, the alleged offence took place on 25.06.1993 and immediately, after the said conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court, the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody and thereafter, by virtue of the bail granted by this Court on 19.03.2004, he came out of the jail. From the above, it is clear that the petitioner had suffered sentence of imprisonment for some period. As the offence occurred in the year 1993 and in the light of the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner by the trial Court can be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 7. Accordingly, the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner by the trial Court is reduced from six months R.I. to the period already undergone by him. Except the said modification, in all other aspects, the criminal revision case is dismissed. ___________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J Date:24.11.2010 sj