O R D E R:

This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner aggrieved by the judgment dated 30.08.2013 in Criminal Appeal No.187 of 2011 on the file of the learned IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, at Hyderabad (for short, “the appellate Court”) modifying the judgment dated 24.01.2011 in C.C.No.564 of 2006 on the file of the learned VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad (for short, “the trial Court”).

2. Heard Mr.C.Vijaya Shekar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.1 and Mr.E.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent-State.

3. The brief facts of the case are that one Dhanraj, who is a resident of H.No.4-9-123, LIC Colony, Hayathnagar, R.R.District gave a complaint to the Investigation Officer Mr.K.Yerisavali, S.I. of Police, Dabeerpura stating that the said house belonged to his grandmother Late Smt. Muthumma @ Muthu; late Agamaiah and late Shiva Ram were her sons. It is stated that about two months back, Dhanraj let the house to accused No.1 by dismantling three rooms and constructed a shed with mud and tiles; accused No.1 was irregular in payment of rents and as such, he got her vacated from the house. It is further stated that accused No.1 hatched a plan to grab the said house property and with an ill-intention, she executed a Gift Settlement Deed in favour of accused No.2, who is son of accused No.1. On knowing the same, Dhanraj raised a doubt before the elders and as per their advice, accused No.1 executed registered gift cancellation deed on 01.09.2004. However, accused Nos.1 and 2 hatched a plan to grab the property; they colluded with accused No.3 and created a false document in favour of accused No.3 as if he had purchased the same from accused No.1.

4. As part of conspiracy, accused No.3 filed O.S.No.5811 of 2004 before the learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Hyderabad as against accused Nos.1 and 2. After examination of witnesses and collection of documents, accused Nos.1 and 2 were arrested. Accused No.3 surrendered and upon completion of investigation, charge sheet was laid before the concerned Court. The trial Court took cognizance of the offences under Sections 420, 468 and 471 r/w Section 34 of I.P.C. Upon careful scrutiny of the oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found accused Nos.2 and 3 not guilty for the offences under Sections

420, 468 and 471 of I.P.C. r/w Section 34 of I.P.C. and acquitted them for the said offences; however, accused No.1 was found guilty for the offences under Sections 420, 468 and 471 r/w Section 34 of I.P.C. The operative portion of the said judgment is extracted as under:-

“Taking into consideration her submission, her age and other mitigating circumstances, I opine it would meeds ends of justice if she is sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and also some fine. Hence, accused No.1 is sentenced to Rigorous imprisonment for three years and also to a fine of Rs.1000/- for the offence U/Sec. 468 of I.P.C., in default of payment of fine amount, she shall further undergo simple imprisonment for one month. A1 is further sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of three years and also to a fine of Rs.1000/- for the offence U/Sec.420 of I.P.C.; in default of payment of fine amount, she shall further undergo Simple Imprisonment for one month and A1 is also further sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonmnet for two years for the offence U/Sec.471 of I.P.C. All the sentences shall run concurrently. The Remand period of A1, if any, shall be set off U/Sec.428 of Cr.P.C. A1 is informed of her right to appeal and also legal aid.”

Aggrieved by the same, petitioner/accused No.1 preferred an Appeal.

5. The appellate Court, vide impugned judgment, modified the judgment passed by the trial Court and found petitioner/accused No.1 not guilty for the offences under Sections 420 and 471 of I.P.C. and set aside the conviction imposed against her; fine amount paid by her in the trial C