IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2007 / 11TH MAGHA 1928 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 785 of 1998() ----------------------------- CRA.231/1996 of II ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, KOZHIKODE CC.843/1993 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, VADAKARA .................... REVN. PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED: ----------------------------------------------- KIZHAKKANMANNIL PAVITHRAN, S/O.KANNAN, KAVILUMPARA AMSOM DESOM, P.O.KUNDUTHODE. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.SHYSON P.MANGUZHA THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/01/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, Ag.C.J. ------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.785 of 1998 ------------------------------- Dated, this the 31st day of January, 2007 ORDER This revision arises out of the judgment in Crl.A.No.231 of 1996 of the II Additional Sessions Court, Kozhikode which was filed against the judgment in C.C.No.843 of 1993 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Vadakara. The petitioner/accused was charge sheeted for offences under Sections 279 and 337 of the Indian Penal Code and the learned Magistrate convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each for the said offences. However, the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. On appeal though the learned Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction entered by the trial court, modified the sentence to that of simple imprisonment for two months each with the direction that the sentence would run concurrently. Aggrieved by the same this revision has been filed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that the courts below have committed an error in Crl.R.P.No.785/1998 2 holding the accused guilty for the offence of negligence. Counsel submitted that the accused was driving the bus behind another bus which suddenly stopped without giving any signal was the reason to cause injuries to P.Ws.1 to 10. Counsel further submitted that the injuries suffered by them are not serious in nature which will assail the sentence to the accused. 3. I find no error in the reasoning adopted by the trial court as well as the appellate court. However, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case I modify the sentence to that of a fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rs.Ten thousand) to be deposited by the petitioner before the trial court within a period of three months from today failing which benefit of this order would not be available to him. On deposit of the said amount it will be distributed equally to P.Ws.1 to 10. Revision petition is disposed of accordingly. K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, Ag.Chief Justice. vns