IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2010 / 15TH ASHADHA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2002 of 2010() ------------------------------ CRA.179/2005 of COURT OF SESSIONS, THALASSERY CC.100/2004 of CHIEF JUDITIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THALASSERY .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANTS/ACCUSED 1 ----------------------------------------- 1. JAYAKUMAR, S/O.VASUDEVAN, AGED 23, PAINTER, IRIVERI, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. SAJEEVAN, S/O.KUNHAMBU, AGED 29, ALUMINIUM FABRICATION WORKER, IRIVERI, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. PRAMOD, S/O.RAMAN, AGED 30, COOLIE, IRIVERI, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.SHANOJ RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE -------------------------------- 1. SHO, CHAKKARAKAL POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, THALASSERY. 2. KARIMBIN VEETIL SANTHOSH KUMAR, S/O.SREEDHARAN, AUTO DRIVER, KARIBIN VEETTIL, IRIVERY AMSOM DESOM, KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT BY ADVS.SRI.C.M.NAZAR, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R1 SRI.RIYAD.C.I FOR R2. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ami/ V.K.MOHANAN, J. ------------------------------- Crl. R.P.No.2002 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of July, 2010. O R D E R The revision petitioners are the accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 in C.C.No.100/04 of the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate (IInd class) IAS Probationer, by which the revision petitioners are stand convicted and sentenced u/s.341, 323, 324, 427 r/w. 34 of IPC. Against the conviction and sentence though an appeal was preferred by the revision petitioners, the lower appellate court by judgment dated 30.4.2010 in Crl.A.No.179/05, dismissed the above appeal confirming the conviction and sentence. It is the above judgments of the courts below and the conviction and sentence imposed against the revision petitioners u/s.341, 323, 324, 427 r/w. 34 of IPC are challenged in this revision petition. In this revision petition, apart from the State represented by the Station House Officer, Chakkarakal Police Station, the defacto complainant is also impleaded as 2nd respondent. 2. Today by a separate order in Crl.M.A.No.6366/10, this court accorded permission to the contestant parties to Crl. R.P.No.2002 of 2010 2 compound the offences and the composition of the above offences were recorded. 3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances involved in the case and in the light of the order passed by this court in Crl.M.A.No.6366/10, I am of the view that the conviction and sentence imposed against the revision petitioner can be set aside and the revision petitioners/accused can be acquitted by virtue of S.320(8) of Cr.P.C. In the result, this revision petition is allowed setting aside the judgments of the courts below and acquitting the revision petitioners of all the charges levelled against them and they are set at liberty. Criminal revision petition is disposed of accordingly. V.K.MOHANAN, Judge. ami/