ITEM NO.8                 COURT NO.10               SECTION IIA

           S U P R E M E   C O U R T   O F   I N D I A                          RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS                      Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No(s).261/2008

(From the  judgement and order dated  27/04/2007  in  CRLRA  No.  183/2007   of  The  HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY)

VISHWAMBHAR NARAYAN JADHAV                           Petitioner(s)

                     VERSUS

MALLAPPA SANGRAMAPPA MALLIPATIL & ANR.               Respondent(s)

(With appln(s) for exemption from filing O.T.,stay and office report ))

Date: 02/12/2008  This Petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MARKANDEY KATJU         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AFTAB ALAM

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Venkateshwara Rao Anumolu, Adv.for                      Mr. Gopal Balwant Sathe,Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Rajesh Mahale,Adv.

          UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following                                O R D E R  

Leave granted.

The Appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.

(Parveen Kr. Chawla) Court Master

(Indu Satija) Court Master

[Signed Reportable Order is placed on the File]

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1951 OF 2008 (Arising out of SLP(Criminal) No.261 of 2008)

Vishwambhar Narayan Jadhav ..Appellant

versus

Mallappa Sangramappa Mallipatil & Anr. ..Respondents

O R D E R

Leave granted.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

This Appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of  the Bombay

High Court dated 27th April, 2007 in Criminal Revision Application No.183 of 2007.

The facts of the prosecution case are mentioned in the FIR dated 25th January,

2002, copy of which has been annexed as Annexure P-3 to this appeal.  In the FIR, it has

been mentioned that while the appellant was on a bus, respondent No.1 entered the bus

and came to the seat of the appellant and said that you always harassed my uncle and he

started abusing the appellant.   Respondent No.1  then took a bottle  of  acid from his

pocket and poured the acid on the head of the appellant with the result that the face,

neck, eyes, chest etc. of the appellant were seriously burnt.  Appellant was then taken to

the hospital  where he was  given medical treatment.   We have seen the  photographs

showing serious burn injuries on the head, face and  chest of the appellant.

The trial Court, by its judgment dated 06th October, 2004, found respondent

No.1  guilty under Section 326,  IPC and sentenced him to suffer three years' rigorous

imprisonment with a fine of  Rs.3,000/-,  in default  to  undergo further three months'

simple imprisonment.

Against the aforesaid judgment, respondent No.1  filed an appeal before the

Additional Sessions Judge, who by his judgment dated 13th April, 2007 confirmed the

conviction and sentence awarded by the trial Court.

Thereafter,  it  appears  that  respondent  No.1  filed  a  Criminal  Revision

Application No.183/2007 before the Bombay High Court and by the impugned judgment,

the High Court reduced the sentence to the period already undergone but the fine was

increased to Rs. 20,000/-.

We are surprised that the High Court has, in such a heinous crime, chosen to

reduce the punishment to the sentence already undergone which we are informed was only

35 days.  In our opinion, there was no occasion for the High Court to interfere with the

judgment of the trial Court and the first appellate court.  Respondent No.1 appears to be

a person who has criminal inclinations and no leniency is called for for such persons,

otherwise people will not be able to go around in life in peace.

Accordingly,  we set  aside the judgment of  the High Court and restore the

judgment of the trial court and first appellate  

court.  Respondent No.1 be taken into custody forthwith to serve out his remaining part

of sentence.

..........................J. [MARKANDEY KATJU]

NEW DELHI; ...........................J. DECEMBER 02, 2008. [AFTAB ALAM]