IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2009 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3691 of 2009() ------------------------------ CRA.484/2008 of SPECIAL ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (MARADU CASES), KOZHIKODE CC.190/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-V, KOZHIKODE .................... REVN. PETITIONERS: APPELLANTS/ACCUSED --------------------------------------- 1. SANTHOSH, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. SEKHARAN, MANDAYIL HOUSE, PURAKKADEKANDY PARAMBA, BEYPORE AMSOM, NADUVATTOM DESOM OF KOZHIKODE TALUK. 2. RUGMINI AGED 79 YEARS, W/O. SEKHARAN, MANDAYIL HOUSE, PURAKKADEKANDY PARAMBA, BEYPORE AMSOM, NADUVATTOM DESOM OF KOZHIKODE TALUK 3. PREMARAJAN, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O. SEKHARAN, MANDAYIL HOUSE PURAKKADEKANDY PARAMBA, BEYPORE AMSOM, NADUVATTOM DESOM OF KOZHIKODE TALUK. 4. RAVI ALIAS RAVEENDRAN, AGED 69 YEARS, S/O. GOPI, MOORKOTH HOUSE, PURAKKADEKANDY PARAMBA, BEYPORE AMSOM, NADUVATTOM DESOM OF KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SMT.PREETHY KARUNAKARAN SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH) RESPONDENT: --------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, RE.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RITHWIK THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/12/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.S.GOPINATHAN,J. ----------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.3691 of 2009 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of December, 2009 ORDER The Sub Inspector of Police, Marad Police Station in Crime No.23 of 2005 filed a charge sheet against the revision petitioners alleging offence under Sections 341, 323 and 427 read with Section 34 I.P.C. The learned Magistrate, after trial, arrived a finding of guilty. Consequently, the revision petitioners were convicted and sentenced to simple imprisonment for one month for offence under Section 341 I.P.C. and simple imprisonment for six months each for offence under Sections 323 and 427 read with section 34 I.P.C. In Criminal Appeal No.484 of 2008, the sentence for offences under Sections 323 and 427 I.P.C. was reduced to simple imprisonment for three months. Assailing the above concurrent finding of conviction and sentence as modified in appeal, this revision petition was filed. 2. Having heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the public prosecutor and perusing the judgments of the courts below, I find that by the evidence of Pws.1 and 5, the prosecution had succeeded to establish that at 8.30p.m. on 26/3/2005 while PW.5 driving an autorikshaw through a road in Crl.R.P.No.3691 of 2009 2 front of M.S.Mill near Pinnanath Temple, the revision petitioners wrongfully restrained PW.5 along with the autorikshaw and the first revision petitioner in furtherance of the common intention committed mischief by breaking the window pane of the autorikshaw, thereby caused damage to the tune of Rs.400/-. The revision petitioners 2 to 4 then assaulted PW.5 by beating with hand. The courts below concurrently believed the evidence of Pws.1 and 5. I am unable to find any error, illegality or impropriety. The conviction under challenge is unassailable. 3. Ext.P5 wound certificate would show that in fact PW.5 did not sustain any external injury. But, had sustained pain. Damage sustained to the autorikshaw was only Rs.400/-. The revision petitioners are aged 39, 75, 50 and 65 years respectively. The second revision petitioner is a house wife. It is also revealed that the dispute arose in respect of a pathway running through the side of the shop of PW.1 and that the PW.1 and the revision petitioners are neighbours and that the dispute was in between them and PW.5 happened to be an accidental victim of the dispute. The injury and damage sustained were very minor. In the above circumstance, I find that a sentence of Crl.R.P.No.3691 of 2009 3 fine of Rs.500/- each for offences under Sections 323, 341 and 427 read with section 34 I.P.C would meet the ends of justice. Total fine Rs.1,500/-(Rupees One thousand five hundred only) per head. In the result, this revision petition is allowed in part. While confirming the conviction, the sentence is reduced to a fine of Rs.500/- each for offences under Sections 323, 341 and 427 read with section 34 I.P.C. In default of payment of fine, the revision petitioners shall undergo simple imprisonment for one month. Fine, if realised, Rs.2,500/- (Rupees two thousand and five hundred only) shall be paid to PW.5 as compensation. P.S.GOPINATHAN,JUDGE skj