IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2009 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1098 of 2009() ------------------------------ CRA.217/2007 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT,-I, MAVELIKKARA CC.713/2005 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KAYAMKULAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): --------------------- RAJAN, S/O. MADHAVAN, KOLLANTTAYYATHU VEEDU, KAPPIKIZHAKKUM MURI, KRISHNAPURAM VILLAGE, KAYAMKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.HARILAL SRI.R.GOPAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P. RAVEENDRA BABU THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. ````````````````` Crl.R.P. No. 1098 of 2009 ````````````````` Dated: 6-4-2009 O R D E R In this revision filed under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 Cr.P.C. the petitioner who is the accused in C.C. No. 713 of 2005 on the file of the J.F.C.M. Kayamkulam for an offence punishable under Section 324 I.P.C. challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him by the lower appellate court for an offence punishable under Sec. 323 I.P.C. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: On 25-7-2005 at about 12 noon while P.W.1 Chellamma was proceeding along the pathway situated in Ward No. 8 in the company of CW2 a small baby, the accused out of his enmity towards P.W.1 assaulted her with a piece of cutjan causing minor injuries to P.W.1 and CW2. The accused has thereby committed an offence punishable under Sec. 324 I.P.C. 3. On the accused pleading not guilty to the charge Crl.R.P. No. 1098 of 2009 -:2:- framed against him by the trial court for the aforementioned offences, the prosecution was permitted to adduce evidence in support of its case. The prosecution altogether examined 5 witnesses as P.Ws 1 to 5 and got marked 5 documents as Exts. P1 to P5 and a cutjan as MO1. 4. After the close of the prosecution evidence, the accused was questioned under Sec. 313 (1)(b) Cr.P.C. with regard to the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the evidence for the prosecution. He denied those circumstances and maintained his innocence. He did not adduce any defence evidence when called upon to do so. 5. The learned Magistrate, after trial, as per judgment dated 15-3-2007 found the revision petitioner guilty of the ffences under Sec. 324 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and also to pay a compensation of Rs. 2,500/- to P.Ws. 1 and 2 respectively. On appeal preferred by the revision petitioner before the Sessions Court, the Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Mavelikkara as per judgment dated 28/2/2008 altered the conviction into one punishable under Sec. 323 I.P.C. and sentenced the revision petitioner to Crl.R.P. No. 1098 of 2009 -:3:- simple imprisonment for 15 days and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-. Hence, this Revision. 6. Eventhough the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner assailed on various grounds the conviction entered against the revision petitioner, in as much as the conviction has been recorded by the courts below concurrently after a careful evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence in the case, this Court sitting in revision will be loathe to interfere with the said conviction which is accordingly confirmed. 7. What now survives for consideration is the question regarding the adequacy or otherwise of the sentence imposed on the revision petitioner. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the revision petitioner deserves penal servitude by way of incarceration for the said conviction. I am of the view that interest justice will be adequately met by imposing a sentence to be passed hereinafter. Accordingly, for his conviction under Sec. 323 I.P.C., the revision petitioner is sentenced to imprisonment till rising of the Court and to pay a sum of Rs. 3,500/- each to P.W.1 and C.W.2 by way of compensation under Sec. 357 (3) Crl.R.P. No. 1098 of 2009 -:4:- Cr.P.C. On default to pay the compensation, the revision petitioner shall undergo simple imprisonment for three months. The revision petitioner is given one month's time to deposit the compensation amount of Rs. 7,000/- before the trial court. In the result, this Revision is disposed of confirming the conviction entered but modifying the sentence imposed as above. Sd/-V.Ramkumar, Judge. /true copy/ ani.