IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 6TH JUNE 2008 / 16TH JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1816 of 2008() ------------------------------ CRA.324/2007 of the ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (AD HOC II), THODUPUZHA CC.364/2005 of J.F.C.M- I, PEERUMEDU .................... REVN. PETITIONER: ACCUSED/APPELLANT ----------------------------------- SATHEESH @ SATHEESAN, S/O.MANI, PUTHENPURACKAL VEEDU, ODAMODU BHAGAM, MURIKKADI KARA, KUMALY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.K.SATHEESH KUMAR RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT/RESPONDENT ----------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.M.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/06/2008 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. =================== Cr.R.P.No. 1816 of 2008 =================== Dated:06.06.2008 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. 364 of 2005 on the file of the J.F.C.M-1, Peerumedu for offences punishable under Section 324 IPC challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him. 2. The case of the prosecution an be summarised as follows: On 10.09.05, at 5.45 p.m. at Odamedu Murikkadi in Kumily village, in front of the shop of one Tomy, due to privious animosity towards PW1 -Raju, the accused voluntarily caused hurt to PW1 by hitting with a stone on both sides of his head causing injuries on the forehead above the right eye-brow and on the scalp above pinna of the left ear. The accused has thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 324 IPC. 3. On the accused pleading not guilty to the charge framed against him by the trial court for the aforementioned Crl.R.P.No.1816/2008 -:2:- offence, the prosecution was permitted to adduce evidence in support of its case. The prosecution altogether examined 8 witnesses as P.Ws 1 to 8 and got marked 6 documents as Exts. P1 to 96 and a shirt as MO1. 4. After the close of the prosecution evidence, the accused was questioned under Sec. 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 17.10.07 found the revision petitioner guilty of the offence punishable under Section 324 I.P.C. and sentenced him to simple imprisonment for 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and on default to pay the fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. On appeal preferred by the revision petitioner before the Sessions Court, Thodupuzha, the lower appellate court as per judgment dated 31.01.08 confirmed the conviction entered and the sentence passed against the revision petitioner. Hence, this Revision. Crl.R.P.No.1816/2008 -:3:- 6. Eventhough 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 interest justice will be adequately met by imposing a sentence to be passed hereinafter. Accordingly, the sentence imposed on the revision petitioner is set aside and instead he is sentenced to imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay an amount of Rs.7,500/- (Rupees seven thousand five hundred only) as compensation to PW1 under Section 357(1) Cr.P.C and on default to pay the compensation, the petitioner shall suffer simple Crl.R.P.No.1816/2008 -:4:- imprisonment for two months . The compensation amount shall be deposited before the trial court within two months from today. In the result, this Revision is disposed of confirming the conviction entered but modifying the sentence imposed as above. V.Ramkumar, Judge. sj