IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.R.UDAYABHANU WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH JUNE 2007 / 6TH ASHADHA 1929 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 948 of 1999() ---------------------------------- CRA.293/1997 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, THRISSUR DT.4.10.1999. CC.217/1995 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, KUNNAMKULAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ ACCUSED ----------------------- PURUSHOTHAMAN, S/O.THEYYUNNI, CHOZHIYATTAYIL THIYYATH HOUSE, PUNNAYURKULAM AMSOM, CHERAYI DESOM, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU RESPONDENT: RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT ----------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.DILIP THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.RP. NO.948/1999 ORDER ON CRL. MP. 4384/1999 IN CRL.RP. 948/1999 DISMISSED 27.06.2007 SD/- K.R.UDAYABHANU, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE tss K.R. UDAYABHANU, J. --------------------------------------------------------------- Crl. R.P. No.948 of 1999 -------------------------------------------------------------- Dated 27th June, 2007 ORDER The revision petitioner stands convicted for the offences under sections 341 and 323 IPC and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.250/- for the offence under section 341 IPC and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 7 days. He is also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- for the offence under section 323 IPC and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months. Out of the fine amount if realised, Rs.1000/- is to be given to PW-1 as compensation. 2. The prosecution case is that on 28-5-93 at 9.30 a.m the accused caught hold of PW-1, the defacto complainant, who is his estranged wife and fisted her and kicked her. The evidence adduced in the matter consisted of the testimony of PWs 1 to 7 and Exts.P1 to P4. 3. PW-4 doctor has proved Ext.P3 wound certificate. CRRP 948/99 2 The testimony of PW-2, the son of PW-1 and the accused, corroborates the evidence of PW-1/de facto complainant. No contradiction in the evidence of PW-s 1 and 2 with respect to the incident with their previous statements have been brought out. In the circumstances, I find no reason to interfere in the concurrent findings of the courts below. The conviction is confirmed. The Crl.R P is dismissed. K.R.UDAYABHANU, JUDGE. Kvm/- CRRP 948/99 3 K.R.UDAYABHANU, J. CRL.R.P.948 OF 1999 ORDER 27-6-2007