IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 14TH JULY 2008 / 23RD ASHADHA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2303 of 2008() ------------------------------ CRA.119/2001 of II ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM CC.687/1997 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KOLLAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER: ------------------ JOY, S/O. RAIMOND, BUNGLAVIL KADAVIL VEEDU, KIDAPPURAM MURI,MUNTROTHURUTHU VILLAGE KOLLAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EAST KALLADA POLICE STATION, IN CRIME NI.59/97,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 14/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. ````````````````` Crl. R.P. NO. 2303 of 2008 ````````````````` Dated: 14-07-2008 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.687 of 1997 on the file of the J.F.C.M.I, Kollam for an offence punishable under Section 324 I.P.C. challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him for the aofrementioned offence 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: On 13-4-1997 at 4 p.m. while P.W.1 was passing along the road in front of the house of the accused to Areakalkadavu , the accused voluntarily caused hurt to P.W.1 by stabbing him on the front of right chest with a knife. The accused has thereby committed an offence punishable under Sec. 325 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 6 witnesses as P.Ws 1 to 6 and got marked 6 documents as Exts. P1 to P6. objects as MOs............. -:2:- 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 25-06-2001 found the revision petitioner guilty of the offence and sentenced him to simple imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- and on default to pay the fine to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. From and out of the fine amount an amount of Rs. 1500/- was directed to be paid as compensation to P.W.1. On appeal preferred by the revision petitioner before the Sessions Court , Kollam the lower appellate court as per judgment dated 14-01-2008 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 -:3:- 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, the sentence imposed on the revision petitioner is set aside and instead he is sentenced to imprisonment till rising of the Court and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- and on default to pay the fine to suffer simple imprisonment for three months. The petitioner shall deposit the fine amount before the trial court within one month from today. From out of the fine amount, a sum of Rs. 4000/- shall be paid to P.W.1 as compensation under Sec. 357 (1) Cr.P.C. In the result, this Revision is disposed of confirming the conviction entered but modifying the sentence imposed as above. V.Ramkumar, Judge. ani. -:4:-