THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALAKRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.201 of 2002 DATED: 15-07-2010 ORDER: This revision is filed by the de facto complainant, who was examined as P.W.1, questioning the judgment, dated 19-12-2001, passed in S.C.No.53 of 1998 by the learned IV Additional District & Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam. 2. During the course of trial, P.Ws.1 to 12 were examined on behalf of the prosecution and Exs.P1 to P14 were marked. Similarly, D.W.1 was examined on behalf of the defence and Exs.D1 to D18 were marked. 3. On an analysis of the said evidence, the learned Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that A1 alone is guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC and acquitted the remaining accused. As the 1st accused was found guilty he was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and also to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC. He is also convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC. Questioning the said judgment, the 1st accused preferred Crl.A.No.1834 of 2001 and the de facto complainant, who was examined as P.W.1, preferred this revision stating that the accused Nos.2 and 3 ought not to have been acquitted for the said offences and further the sentence of one year imposed insofar as the 1st accused is concerned is inadequate and therefore sought for enhancement of the said sentence. 4. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 5. When this matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the respondents brought to the notice of this Court the judgment, dated 27-04-2006, in Crl.A.No.1834 of 2001, whereby this Court was pleased to hold that the 1st accused-appellant therein was not guilty of the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC and accordingly acquitted him of the said charge. 6. In the light of the said judgment, this Court is of the view that no other view can be taken against the respondents herein. There are no merits in this revision. 7. Accordingly, Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. _______________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA,J 15th July, 2010. Tsy