IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 4TH JANUARY 2010 / 14TH POUSHA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3389 of 2009() ------------------------------ CRA.45/2007 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, PALAKKAD CC.351/2005 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, CHITTUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3 1. DIVAKARAN, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. MAYAN, KARATTUPADAM, MYLAPPU, KOLLENGODE, PALAKKAD. 2. ANANDAN, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O. MAYAN, KARATTUPADAM, MYLAPPU, KOLLENGODE, PALAKKAD. 3. CHAMIKUTTY, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O. CHINNAPPAN, EZHUTHACHAN, KARATTUPADAM, MYLAPPU, KOLLENGODE, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN SRI.NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE ASST. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLLENGODE POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S.HRITHWICK THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.R.P.No.3389 of 2009 = == = = = = = = = = = == Dated: 04.01.2010 O R D E R In this revision filed under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 Cr.P.C., the petitioners who were accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C. No. 351 of 2005 on the file of the J.F.C.M, Chittur for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 324 read with 34 IPC challenge the conviction entered and the sentence passed against A1 for an offence punishable under Section 324 IPC and against A2 and A3 for an offence punishable under Section 323 I.PC. The revision petitioners were acquitted of the rest of the offences. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: On 17.5.2005, at about 9 P.M, the accused persons, out of their enmity towards PW2, and in furtherance of their common intention to voluntarily cause hurt to PW2, wrongfully restrained him and A1 hit him on the left side of Crl.R.P.No.3389/09 -:2:- his temple with a granite stone causing injury and A2 and A3 slapped and kicked him causing injuries. The accused have thereby committed offences punishable under Sections 341,323, 324 read with Section 34 IPC 3. On the accused pleading not guilty to the charge framed against them by the trial court for the aforementioned offences, the prosecution was permitted to adduce evidence in support of its case. The prosecution altogether examined 6 witnesses as P.Ws. 1 to 6 and got marked 4 documents as Exts. P1 to P4. 4. After the close of the prosecution evidence, the accused were questioned under Sec. 313 (1)(b) Cr.P.C. with regard to the incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the evidence for the prosecution. They denied those circumstances and maintained their innocence. They did not adduce any defence evidence when called upon to do so. 5. The learned Magistrate, after trial, as per Crl.R.P.No.3389/09 -:3:- judgment dated 27.12.2006 found the 1st accused guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 324 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.4,000/- and on default to pay the fine to suffer simple imprisonment for two months. For the conviction under Section 323 IPC, Accused Nos.2 and 3 were each sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. From out of the fine amount a sum of Rs.3000/- in all was directed to be paid to PW2 as compensation. On appeal preferred by the accused before the Sessions Court, Palakkad as Crl.Appeal No.45 of 2007, the lower appellate court as per judgment dated 20th October, 2009 reduced the sentence passed against A1 to simple imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-(Rupees one thousand only). It is the said order which is assailed in this Revision by A1 and A3. 6. This Court, while admitting the revision petition had called for a report of the District Probation Officer. In Crl.R.P.No.3389/09 -:4:- the confidential report submitted by the District Probation Officer, Palakkad, he has reported that all the three accused persons are 1st offenders hoping to get the court's benevolence for getting a chance to reform in future and that all of them are now leading a calm and law abiding life and prepared to work hard for their livelihood and that the marriage of the 3rd accused has been fixed next month. The District Probation Officer has thus recommended that the revision petitioners may be released on probation of good conduct under Sections 4(1) and (3) of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. 7. Considering the report of the District Probation Officer, eventhough the conviction recorded against the revision petitioner is confirmed, I am inclined to release them on probation for a period of one year on each of them executing a bond in that behalf before the trial court within two months from today. Accused No.1 shall however pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) and accused Crl.R.P.No.3389/09 -:5:- Nos.2 and 3 shall each pay a sum of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) as compensation to PW2, the injured under Section 5 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. The compensation shall be either paid to PW2 or deposited before the trial court within two months from today. The petitioners shall appear before the trial court within two months from today to execute the necessary bond under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. 8. Amounts, if any, deposited by the revision petitioners shall be adjusted towards the compensation and if there is any excess amount deposited by the 1st accused, it shall be refunded to him. This Crl.R.P. is allowed as above. V.Ramkumar, Judge. sj Crl.R.P.No.3389/09 -:6:-