IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 26TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 7TH PHALGUNA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 752 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRA.470/2006 of II ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD CC.496/2004 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, PALAKKAD .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): --------------------- BABURAJAN, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. VELAYUDHAN, DOOR NO. 208, RAILWAY COLONY, GFANESHGIRI, SHORNUR, OTTAPALAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.ABDUL JAWAD SRI.U.MUHAMMED MUSTHAFA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUZHALMANNAM POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. PUZHAKKARA MUHAMMED THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. ````````````````` Crl.R.P. NO. 752 of 2009 ````````````````` Dated: 26-02-2009 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..496 of 2004 on the file of the J.F.C.M.I, Palakkad for offences punishable under Sections 279 and 338 challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him for offences punishable under Sections 255(2), 279 and 338 I.P.C. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: On 12-10-1993 at about 2.30 p.m. the accused drove a stage carriage bus bearing Reg. No. KL9A/6742 in a rash and negligent manner endangering human life from east to west through Kuzhalmannam-Kottayi road and when the bus reached Periyapalam it dashed against P.W.1 who was riding a bicycle Crl.R.P. No. 752 of 2009 -:2:- resulting in P.W.1 sustaining grevious injuries including fracture of the right 5 th metacarpel bone. 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 10 witnesses as P.Ws 1 to 10 and got marked 6 documents as Exts. P1 to P6. 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 19 th June, 2006 found the revision petitioner guilty of the offences and sentenced him to simple imprisonment for one month each of the offences and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- each Crl.R.P. No. 752 of 2009 -:3:- and on default to pay fine to suffer default sentence. On appeal preferred by the revision petitioner before the Sessions Court, Palakkad, the lower appellate court as per judgment dated, 15 th October 2008 confirmed the conviction entered and the sentence passed against the revision petitioner. 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 Crl.R.P. No. 752 of 2009 -:4:- adequately met by imposing a sentence to be passed hereinafter. Accordingly for his conviction under Section 279 I.P.C. the revision petiitoner is sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- and on default to pay the fine he shall suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days. For his conviction under Sec. 338 I.P.C. he is sentenced to imprisonment till rising of the Court and to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as compensation to P.W.1 the injured under Sec. 357 (3) Cr.P.C. In case the petitioner commits default in paying the compensation, he shall suffer simple imprisonment for three months. The petitioner is granted 45 days' time to deposit before the trial court the fine amount as well as the compensation. In the result, this Revision is disposed of confirming the conviction entered but modifying the sentence imposed as above. Dated this the 26 th day of February, 2009. Sd/- V.Ramkumar, Judge. /true copy/ Crl.R.P. No. 752 of 2009 -:5:- ani.