IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2009 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1052 of 2001(A) ------------------------ {CR.A.NO.229/1998 OF THE II ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM IN C.C.NO.227/1997 OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II (FOREST OFFENCES), PUNALUR} .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANTS/ACCUSED 1, 2, 5 & 6: ----------------------------------------------- 1. RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI ALIAS RAJAN, RESIDING AT PLATHARA PUTHEN VEEDU, MANJAMANKALA, ELAMBAL MURI, VILAKUDY VILLAGE, PUNALUR, KOLLAM. 2. RAJAGOPALAN ALIAS RAJAN, RESIDING AT SREEMANGALATHU VEEDU, MANJAMANKALA, ELAMBAL MURI, VILAKUDY VILLAGE, PUNALUR, KOLLAM. 3. KUTTAPPAN, RESIDING AT PLATHARA PUTHEN VEEDU, MANJAMANKALA, ELAMBAL MURI, VILAKUDY VILLAGE, PUNALUR, KOLLAM. 4. ANILKUMAR, RESIDING AT MUNDUVILATHAZHATHIL VEEDU, MANJAMANKALA, ELAMBAL MURI, VILAKUDY VILLAGE, PUNALUR, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.SHAMIER MARICKAR RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1052 of 2001(A) :: 2 :: 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUNALUR, KOLLAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- CRL.R.P.No.1052 of 2001 ------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of March, 2009. O R D E R Accused 1, 2, 5 and 6 in C.C.No.227/97 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II (Forest Offences), Punalur, who have been convicted for offences under Sections 323 and 341 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the Code'}, are the petitioners herein. 2. The prosecution alleged that the accused persons, on 27.4.1996 at 6.30 PM, had unlawfully assembled at Manjamankala situated in Vilakkudi Village, for prosecuting their common object of attacking CW.1, who was walking along the road. The accused persons, six in number, wrongfully restrained and attacked CW.1. He sustained injuries. Therefore, the accused have committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 323 and 341 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution examined Pws.1 to 5; PW.1 being the injured himself and Pws.2 and 3, being the eye witnesses. Their evidence was believed by the trial court and accordingly, CRL.R.P.No.1052 of 2001 :: 2 :: accused 1, 2, 5 and 6 were convicted for offences under Sections 323 and 341 of the Code. The trial court sentenced each of them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months and also directed them to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each, with a default sentence, under Section 323 of the Code. But no separate sentence was awarded under Section 341 of the Code. The appellate court confirmed the conviction, but modified the sentence by reducing the period of imprisonment from six months to three months, retaining the fine amount with default sentence. It is aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, that the present revision has been filed. 4. I heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. I have considered the evidence and also perused the judgments of the courts below. 5. That the incident had taken place as alleged by PW.1 is corroborated by Pws.2 and 3. That PW.1 had sustained an injury in an attack, which took place on 27.4.1996 is proved by the evidence of Pws.1 to 5. The investigating officer was not cross-examined by the learned counsel for the defence also. The CRL.R.P.No.1052 of 2001 :: 3 :: court below had correctly come to the conclusion that the accused are liable to be convicted for the offence under Sections 323 and 341 of the Code. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the sentence of imprisonment may not be appropriate or justified in this case. Though according to PW.1 he sustained injuries all over his body and was under treatment for 12 days, there was total dearth of evidence in this regard. No wound certificate was produced. No doctor was examined as such. 7. I heard learned Public Prosecutor in this regard. I am of the view that the interest of justice would be met, if imprisonment till the rising of the court with a direction for payment of fine separately for offences under Sections 323 and 341 is ordered. 8. Accordingly, while confirming the conviction of each of the petitioners/accused herein under Sections 323 and 341 of the Code, each of the petitioners herein is sentenced to imprisonment till the rising of the court and each one of them shall pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under Section 323 of CRL.R.P.No.1052 of 2001 :: 4 :: the Code. They shall, in addition, pay an amount of Rs.500/- as fine, for the offence under Section 323 of the Code. In default of payment of fine, they shall also undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months under Section 323 and in default of payment of fine under Section 341, they shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. The fine amount, when remitted shall be paid as compensation to PW.1. Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge