IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2010 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1031 of 2010() ------------------------------ CRA.149/2009 of IV ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, THODUPUZHA CC.242/2007 of JUDL. MAGI. OF FIRST CLASS-I, THODUPUZHA .................... REVN. PETITIONER:PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:- -------------------------------------------------------------- SHYJU, S/O.PAVITHRAN, CHELAPLACKAL HOUSE, PERINGASSERY KARA, UDUMBANOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. MR. LATHEESH SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/ACCUSED:- --------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. MR. P.A. SALIM, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. =================== Crl.R.P. No. 1031 of 2010 =================== Dated this the 24th day of March, 2010. O R D E R In this revision filed under Section 397 read with Sec. 401 Cr.P.C. the petitioner who was the sole accused in C.C. No.242 of 2007 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate - I, Thodupuzha for an offence punishable under Section 354 IPC, challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him concurrently by the courts below for the said offences. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: On 26.02.2007, at 2.30 p.m., somewhere on the middle of the Thodupuzha bridge, the accused caught hold of the buttocks of PW1 Subha, the de facto complainant with the intention of outraging her modesty and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 354 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. 1031/2010 -:2:- offence, the prosecution was permitted to adduce evidence in support of its case. The prosecution altogether examined 5 witnesses as P.Ws 1 to 5 and got marked 4 documents as Exts. P1 to P4. 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 08.07.2009 found the revision petitioner guilty of the said offence and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. On appeal preferred by the revision petitioner as Crl. Appeal No. 149 of 2009 before the Sessions Court, Thodupuzha, the IV Additional Sessions Judge as per judgment dated 22.12.2009 dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction entered and the sentence passed against the revision petitioner. Hence, this Revision. Crl.R.P. No. 1031/2010 -:3:- 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 hereinafter. Accordingly, for his conviction under Section 354 IPC, he is sentenced to imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) and on default to pay the fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. From out of the fine amount, a sum of Rs.6000/- Crl.R.P. No. 1031/2010 -:4:- (Rupees six thousand only) shall be paid as compensation to PW1. The petitioner is given one month's time from today to deposit the fine amount before the trial court. In the result, this Revision is disposed of confirming the conviction entered but modifying the sentence imposed as above. Dated this the 24th day of March, 2010. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv