IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 5TH MARCH 2009 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 347 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRA.643/2005 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC), THRISSUR CC.932/2003 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, IRINJALAKUDA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/2ND ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------- BEJOY, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.EKAMBARAN, VALAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KANJANI DESOM, MANALU VILLAGE THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT SRI.RANJIT BABU RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE: ------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAYAKRISHNAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR,J. .......................................................... Crl.R.P. No. 347 of 2009 .......................................................... Dated: 5th March 2009 ORDER The revision petitioner who was the 2nd accused in C.C. No. 932 of 2003 om the file of the J.F.C.M. Irinjalakkuda, has been concurrently convicted by the courts below for an offence punishable under Sec. 379 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. The courts below have concurrently found him guilty along with the first accused for having committed theft by snatching away the gold chain weighing 2 ½ sovereigns and worth Rs. 8,500/- from P.W.1 who was walking along the road. The petitioner was the pillion rider of the motor cycle which was driven by the first accused. The courts below have found that the theft was committed in prosecution of the common intention of the two accused persons. The finding of guilt has been recorded after a careful evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence in the case. I do not see any good ground to interfere with the said finding. The conviction is, accordingly, confirmed. 2. Now coming to the question of sentence also, the same does not call for any interference. This Court had called for an enquiry report from the District Probation Officer, Thrissur. The Crl.R.P. No. 347 of 2009 -:2:- District Probation Officer has reported that the petitioner is involved in eight similar cases namely Crime Nos. 436, 435, 456, 425, 312, 289, 245 and 428 of 2003 of Thrissur Town East Police Station. The report further shows that the character and antecedents of the petitioner are not satisfactory and that he is a habitual and hardened criminal and further that the petitioner does not deserve to be dealt with under the benevolent provisions of the Probation of Offenders' Act, 1958. The sentence imposed on the revision petitioner namely, rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- under Sec. 379 I.P.C. is, accordingly, confirmed. In the result, this Revision is dismissed confirming the conviction and sentence passed against the revision petitioner. Dated this the 5th day of March 2009. Sd/-V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. ani/ /true copy/ Crl.R.P. No. 347 of 2009 -:3:-