IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2008 / 25TH ASHADHA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1571 of 2008() ------------------------------ CRA.236/2007 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, ALAPPUZHA CC.61/2003 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, CHERTHALA .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.2: ----------------------------------------- BAIJU @ RAJU, S/O. KUMARAN, AGED 24 YEARS, NETAJI LAKSHAM VEEDU COLONY, WARD NO.12, MANNANCHERRY PANCHAYAT, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE MATHEW SRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA REP. BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE MUHAMMA POLICE STATION THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P. RAVINDRA BABU THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. ````````````````` Crl.R.P. 1571 of 2008 ````````````````` Dated: 16-07-2008 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.61 of 2003 on the file of the J.F.C.M. II, Cherthala, for offences punishable under Sections 323 and 324 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C., challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him for the aforesaid offences. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: On 29-03-1998 at 5.45 p.m. near Muhamma Junction the two accused persons in furtherance of their common intention to cause hurt to P.Ws 1 and 2 voluntarily caused hurt to P.Ws 1 and 2 by A2 the revision petitioner catching hold of P.W.1 and fisting him on his chest and A1 stabbing P.W.1 on his breast with a knife causing incised injuries. When P.W.2 intervened the revision petitioner caught hold of P.W.2 and A1 stabbed him on the left shoulder beneath the left breat causing incised injuries. Since both the accused committed the aforementioned offences in furtherance of their Crl.R..P. No. 1571 of 2008 -:2:- common intention they have committed offences punishable under Sections 323 and 324 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. 3. On the accused pleading not guilty to the charge 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 8 witnesses as P.Ws 1 to 8 and got marked 6 documents as Exts. P1 to P6 and a knife 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 6/03/2008 found the revision petitioner guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 324 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. and sentenced him to simple imprisonment for three months under Sec. 323 I.P.C. and simple imprisonment for six months under Sec. 324 I.P.C. On appeal preferred by the revision petitioner as Crl.Appeal No. 236 of 2007 before the Sessions Judge. Alappuzha, the Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court, Adhoc -II) Alappuzha as per Crl.R..P. No. 1571 of 2008 -:3:- judgment dated 25-4-2008 dismissed the appeal confirming the sentence passed against the revision petitioner. Hence, this Revision. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that the first accused who is the principal offender who had stabbed P.Ws 1 and 2 is absconding and the act attributed to the revision petitioner is only the act of catching hold of P.Ws 1 and 2 and for the said act even if they are true he does not deserve the punishment. He further contended that both the courts below have failed to consider the grave and sudden provocation offered by PWs 1 and 2 within the meaning of Sec. 334 I.P.C. 7. I am afraid that I cannot agree with the above submissions. Even assuming that the the words attributed to PWs 1 and 2 can be accepted as true they did not have the effect of constituting a grave and sudden provocation so as to justify infliction of injuries on P.W.1 and subsequently on P.W.2. The courts below have recorded the conviction 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. The sentence imposed on the revision petitioner is however set aside and instead he is sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- and on default to pay the fine to suffer simple imprisonment for one month under Sec. 323 I.P.C. For his conviction under Sec. Crl.R..P. No. 1571 of 2008 -:4:- 324 I.P.C. the revision petitioner is sentenced to imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and 3,000/- respectively to P.Ws 1 and 2 under Sec. 357 (3) Cr.P.C. On failure to pay the compensation, the petitioner shall suffer simple imprisonment for three months each by way of default sentence. The fine as well as compensation shall be deposited before the trial court within 45 days from today. In the result, this Revision is disposed of confirming the conviction entered but modifying the sentence imposed as above. Dated, this the 16th day of July 2008. V.Ramkumar, Judge. ani.