IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2010 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3256 of 2010() ---------------------------- CRA.422/2009 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, (ADHOC-I), ERNAKULAM CC.1425/2004 of JUDL. FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... REVISION PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS 1-6/ACCUSED 1-6: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SAJU, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN, ELAMJIKUDIYIL VEEDU, KAVAKKAD KARA, ENANALLOOR VILLAGE. 2. MANU, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.SOMAN, PUVATHOTTIYIL VEEDU, AYAVANA KARA, ENANALLUR VILLAGE. 3. EBY, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.KUMARAN, MURITHOTTATHIL VEEDU, KALAMBOOR KARA, ENANALLUR VILLAGE. 4. GIBI, AGED 28, S/O.THANKAPPAN, NADANCHERRY VEEDU, AYAVANA KARA, ENANALLUR VILLAGE 5. SUBHASH, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.KARUNAKARAN, PULICKAL VEEDU, AYAVANA KARA, ENANALLUR VILLAGE. 6. JOBY, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.PAILY, PARATHANDEL VEEDU, AYAVANA KARA, ENANALLUR VILLAGE. BY ADVS. SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM SRI.JEFF JOSEPH SRI.K.V.VIMAL RESPONDENT / RESPONDENT/STATE & COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY ADDL. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALLOORKKAD (INVESTIGATING OFFICE IN CRIME NO.71/2004) REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN- 682 0031. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. SABU SREEDHARAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn V. RAMKUMAR, J. ================== Crl. R.P. No. 3256 of 2010 ==================== Dated, this the 9th day of December, 2010. ORDER In this Revision filed under Section 397 read with Sec. 401 Cr.P.C., the petitioners challenge the conviction entered and the sentence passed by the courts below for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 341, 323 and 325 r/w Section 149 IPC. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. 3. Even though the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners assailed on various grounds the judgments of the Courts below, I see little scope for interference. The findings recorded by the courts below are on the basis of appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence. Both the courts below have believed the prosecution witnesses. Sitting in the rarefied revisional jurisdiction, this Court will be loathe to interfere with the concurrent findings. I do not find any error, illegality or impropriety in the findings recorded by the courts below. This Revision which is devoid of any merit is accordingly dismissed confirming the conviction entered and the sentence passed against the revision petitioners. Dated this the 9 th day of December, 2010. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE rv