IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 22ND AUGUST 2008 / 31ST SRAVANA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2854 of 2008() ------------------------------ C.C.NO.443/2002 OF JFCM, TIRUR REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------ YAHUTTY @ ASHRAF, S/O.MOHAMMED KUTTY, MENNATH VALAPPIL, THAVANUR AMSOM. BY ADV. SRI.MOHAN PULIKKAL ADV.SRI.SHAJI THOMAS PORKKATTIL ADV.SMT. MANJU RAJAN RESPONDENT: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P.SRI.S.U. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. =================== Crl.R.P. No.2854 of 2008 ==================== Dated this the 22nd day of August, 2008. O R D E R In this revision filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C., the petitioner who is the accused in C.C. No.443/2002 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tirur for offences punishable under Sections 447 and 326 of I.P.C challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him for the aforementioned offences. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: On account of the enmity which the accused was nurturing against the family of PW1, on 14.1.2002 at about 10 a.m the accused criminally trespassed into the courtyard of the house in which PW1 and her family members were residing and voluntarily caused grevious hurt PW1 by hitting her on the head with MO1 axe. The accused has thereby committed the aforementioned offences. 3. On the accused pleading not guilty to the charge CRL.R.P.NO.2854/08 . 2 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 ten witnesses as PWs 1 to 10 and got marked five documents as Exts.P1 to P5 and an axe as MO1. 4. After the close of the prosecution evidence, the accused was questioned under Section 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 28.11.2005 found the revision petitioner guilty of the offences charged against him. For the conviction under Section 447 IPC, he was sentenced to S.I for one month. For the conviction under Section 326 I.P.C, he was sentenced to S.I for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,500/= and on default of payment of fine, to suffer S.I for three months. The CRL.R.P.NO.2854/08 . 3 substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently. On appeal preferred by the revision petitioner as Crl.A.No.482/2005 before the Additional Sessions Court, Manjeri, as per the judgment dated 14.7.2008 confirmed the conviction entered against the revision petitioner but modified the sentence by reducing the S.I to one year under Section 326 I.P.C. Hence, this Revision. 6. Even though 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 CRL.R.P.NO.2854/08 . 4 the said conviction. I am of the view that interests of justice will be adequately met by imposing a sentence to be passed hereinafter. Accordingly, for his conviction under Section 326 I.P.C the revision petitioner is sentenced to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay a compensation of Rs.15,000/= to PW1, the injured under Section 357 (3) Cr.P.C. For his conviction under Section 447 I.P.C, the revision petitioner is sentenced to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay a fine of Rs.500/= and on default of payment of fine to suffer S.I for 4 months. The petitioner shall deposit the compensation as well as the fine before the trial court within 45 days from today. On default of payment of compensation, the petitioner shall suffer S.I. for three months. In the result, this Revision is disposed of confirming the conviction entered but modifying the sentence imposed as above. Dated this the 22nd day of August, 2008. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv CRL.R.P.NO.2854/08 . 5 cl