IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 8TH AUGUST 2011 / 17TH SRAVANA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 91 of 2004(B) ----------------------------- CRA.198/2003 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (SPL.CAURT), KOTTAYAM CC.998/1999 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, CHANGANACHERRY .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.3: -------------------------------------------- SALIMOL, MARANPADATHU HOUSE, CHITTEDY KARA, MUNDAKAYAM VILLAGE. BY ADVS. SRI.SURESH BABU THOMAS SRI.P.RAVINDRA BABU RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.V. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J ----------------------------------------- Crl.R.P. No. 91 of 2004 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of August, 2011. O R D E R The 3rd accused who faced the trial before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Changanacherry is the revision petitioner. She along with another accused was convicted for offence punishable u/s 420 IPC read with 34 IPC and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-. In the appeal filed by her the sentence was modified to simple imprisonment for 3 months, while retaining the order of fine imposed by the learned Magistrate. This revision is filed challenging the said conviction and sentence. 2. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that the courts below did not appreciate the fact that the amount was paid for securing visa. The amount was not directly paid to A3 and so the conviction is bad. Both the courts below after thorough survey of the evidence found that A3, the revision petitioner herein was a Crl.R.P. No. 91 of 2004 2 party to the agreement as per which she and other accused promised the de facto complainant to believe that employment visa would be provided and for that purpose PW3 raised the amount by pledging gold ornaments. Further, there is evidence to show that she was made to believe that in order to go abroad medical test also had to be done. Another sum of Rs.1500/- was spent for that purpose. Visa was not arranged by the revision petitioner and the other two accused. There upon an agreement was executed as per which it was specifically undertaken by the petitioner to provide visa. Still it was not arranged. The prosecution could adduce satisfactory evidence to prove that the accused/revision petitioner was a party to the offending act. The petitioner also made the de facto complainant to believe that visa would be arranged and it was as induced by the said promise, the amount was given by the de facto complainant. In other words, had the de Crl.R.P. No. 91 of 2004 3 facto complainant been not so deceived she would not have parted with the amount. Both the courts below have analysed the evidence in the correct perspective and found the petitioner guilty of the offence u/s 420 IPC. I find no reason to upset that finding. The conviction is thus confirmed. 3. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that as the revision petitioner is a lady, the court may show leniency by altering the sentence to fine or compensation. It is a case where the de facto complainant paid Rs.20,000/- in the year 1999. The depreciation in money value and all other aspects also have to be taken note of . In the result, this criminal revision petition is disposed of as stated below:- The conviction of the revision petitioner for offence u/s 420 IPC is confirmed. In supersession of the sentence Crl.R.P. No. 91 of 2004 4 awarded by the courts below, the revision petitioner is sentenced to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay Rs.70,000/- as compensation to PW3, in default of payment of which the accused/revision petitioner will undergo simple imprisonment for three months. N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE smvd