IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2008 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1649 of 2008() ------------------------------ CRA.303/2007 of IV ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-II), THODUPUZHA CC.500/2006 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT - I, IDUKKI .................... REVN. PETITIONER: PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------------- SHAJI, NELLICKAL HOUSE, UDAYAGIRI KARA, THANKAMANY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGEKUTTY MATHEW RESPONDENTS: STATE -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, THODUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI. P. RAVINDRA BABU, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. =================== Crl.R.P. No. 1649 of 2008 ==================== Dated this the 27th day of May, 2008. O R D E R In this revision filed under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 Cr.P.C. the petitioner who is the accused in C.C. No.500 of 2006 on the file of the J.F.C.M-I, Idukki for offences punishable under Sections 323 and 326 IPC challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him for offences punishable under Sections 323 and 326 IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: On 07.12.2002, at about 6 am, the accused out of previous enemity towards his sister PW1 (Lali) from the courtyard and inside the house of PW1 at Udayagiri kara, voluntarily caused hurt to PW1 by kicking her, fisting her and hitting her with a torch and also with a stick and on account of that, PW1 sustained grievous injuries. The accused had thereby committed offences punishable under Section 323, 326 IPC. CRL.R.P. NO. 1649/2008 : 2: 3. On the accused pleading not guilty to the charge 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 5 witnesses as PWs 1 to 5 and got marked 4 documents as Exts. P1 to P4 and one material object 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 10.10.2007 found the revision petitioner guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 326 IPC and sentenced him to simple imprisonment for three months under Section 323 IPC and simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- and on default to pay the fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month under Section 326 IPC. On CRL.R.P. NO. 1649/2008 : 3: appeal preferred by the revision petitioner before the Sessions Court, Thodupuzha the lower appellate court as per judgment dated 31.12.2007 confirmed the conviction entered and the sentence passed against the revision petitioner. 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 the said conviction. I am of the view that interests of justice will be adequately met by imposing a sentence to be passed CRL.R.P. NO. 1649/2008 : 4: hereinafter. Accordingly, the sentence imposed on the revision petitioner is set aside and instead he is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) and on default to pay the fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days under Section 323 IPC and to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay a compensation of Rs.8,000/- (Rupes eight thousand only) to PW1 under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. In the event of default to pay the compensation, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for one month. The fine as well as compensation shall be deposited before the trial court within 45 days from today. In the result, this Revision is disposed of confirming the conviction entered but modifying the sentence imposed as above. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv