THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.796 of 2011 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the judgment dated 25.3.2011 made in Crl.A.No.182 of 2009 by the III Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District. The case of the prosecution is as follows: On 23.11.2005, the petitioners-A1 and A2 entered into the rented room of Kunda Venkata Ramanjaneyulu alias Ramu by breaking open the locks of the door and committed theft of one Nokia cell phone and one gold ring, all worth Rs.4,000/- and they also broke open the locks of Sriram Chit Funds Office, Addanki. Basing on the report of Kunda Venkata Ramanjaneyulu alias Ramu, a case in Crime No.146 of 2005 on the file of Addanki Police Station was registered for the offences under Sections 457 and 380 IPC. Again, on the night of 6.12.2005 at about 3 a.m., the petitioners- A1 and A2 gained entrance into the house of one Thambi Veera Swamy (P.W.4) through the back side doors and committed theft of two gold rings, one pair of ear studs, one gold nose screw and cash of Rs.1,000/- all worth Rs.11,000/-. Basing on the report of Thambi Veeraswamy a case in crime No.147 of 2005 on the file of Addanki Police Station was registered for the offences under sections 457 and 380 of IPC. After completion of the investigation, a combined charge sheet was filed for the offences under Sections 457, 380 and 411 IPC and the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Addanki, took cognizance of the same and numbered it as C.C.No.62 of 2006. On appreciation of both oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found the petitioners-accused not guilty for the offences under Sections 457 and 380 IPC, but found them guilty for the offence under Section 411 IPC and accordingly, sentenced each of them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default to suffer S.I. for two months each. Challenging the said judgment, the petitioners-accused preferred an appeal in Crl.A.No.182 of 2009 before the II Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ongole. The learned Additional Sessions Judge confirmed the judgment of the Court below. Questioning the said judgment, the petitioners-accused filed the present revision. Learned Counsel for the petitioners-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 offence took place about five years back. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the nature of the offence committed by the petitioners-accused, I feel that the conviction recorded by the Courts below does not warrant any interference. But however, having regard to the fact that the petitioners were in jail for about one month viz., during remand from 23.1.2006 to 15.2.2006 and after the judgment in the appeal, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case where a lenient view can be taken. Accordingly, the sentence imposed by the Courts below against the petitioners-accused for the offence under Section 411 IPC is reduced to the period already undergone, while maintaining the sentence of fine. In the result, the sentence of imprisonment for a period of one year each imposed against the petitioners-A1 & A2 for the offence under Section 411 IPC by the learned Sessions Judge, Prakasam Division, Ongole, in Crl.A.No.182 of 2009 by judgment dated 25.3.2011 is reduced to that of the period, which the petitioners have already undergone while maintaining the sentence of fine. The petitioners are directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other crime. Except to the above modification, in all other aspects, the revision is dismissed. _______________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 31st March, 2011 Nn THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.796 of 2011 31.3.2011