IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2008 / 14TH SRAVANA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 475 of 1999() ----------------------------- CRA.91/1995 of SESSIONS COURT, KOZHIKOE CC.437/1992 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KOZHIKODE .................... REVN. PETITIONER: ------------------------------- SUKUMARAN, S/O.SANKARANKUTTY, THARO HOUSE, KOVOOR AMSOM, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ANTONY SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE S.I. OF POLICE, MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.RAVEENDRA BABU THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. =================== Cr.R.P.No.475 of 1999 =================== Dated: 5.08.2008 O R D E R In this revision filed under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 Cr.P.C. the petitioner who was the accused in C.C. No. 437 of 1992 on the file of the J.F.C.M-I, Kozhikode for offences punishable under Sections 143,147,148,341 and 427 read with 149 IPC challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him concurrently by the courts below for an offence punishable under Section 427 I.PC. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: On 3.8.1922 at about 4.50 p.m. the revision petitioner along with 10 other unidentified persons found themselves into an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of the said assembly from the road near the Medical College Men's Hostel at Mayanad they obstructed a bus bearing No.KEZ 3492 in which PW1 was the conductor and after stopping the bus they broke the glasses, tore the tyres and thereby caused a total loss of Rs.50,000/- to the owner of the bus. Crl.R.P.No.475/1999 -:2:- 3. On the accused pleading not guilty to the charge framed against him by the trial court for the aforementioned offences, 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 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 24.2.1995 found the revision petitioner guilty of the offence punishable under Section 427 I.P.C. and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for six months. On appeal preferred by the revision petitioner before the Sessions Court, Kozhikode, the lower appellate court as per judgment dated 13.1.1999 confirmed the conviction entered and the sentence passed against the revision petitioner. Hence, this Revision. Crl.R.P.No.475/1999 -: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 the interests of 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 a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) as compensation payable to the owner of the bus. The petitioner shall deposit the Crl.R.P.No.475/1999 -:4:- compensation amount within two months from today, failing which he shall undergo simple imprisonment for two months by way of default sentence. In the result, this Revision is disposed of confirming the conviction entered but modifying the sentence imposed as above. Dated this the 5 th day of August, 2008 V.Ramkumar, Judge. sj