IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 105 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRA.534/2006 of SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD SC.79/2002 of ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, OTTAPPALAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER/APPLLANT: ---------------------------------- RAMAKRISHNAN, S/O.KUNJAN, CONVICT NO.7204, CENTRAL PRISON, KANNUR. BY ADV. ADV. MR. C.K.JAYAKUMAR (STATE BRIEF) RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. MR. P.A. SALIM, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. =================== Crl.R.P. No. 105 of 2010 =================== Dated this the 1st day of March, 2010. O R D E R In this revision preferred from the Central Prison, Kannur, the petitioner who was the sole accused in Sessions Case No.79 of 2002 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Ottapalam for an offence punishable under Section 307 IPC, challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him for the said offence. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: On 04.10.2000, at about 1 p.m., PW4 (Ramankutty) was passing along the pathway going from Palappuram Railway Station towards Kuthampully. On the way, he met the accused who was selling toddy outside the compound of one Indira. PW4 bought some toddy and consumed the same. There occurred some altercation with regard to the amount payable by PW4. While so, the accused took out MO1 knife and stabbed PW4 on the chest, neck and stomach causing grievous injuries. The Crl.R.P. No. 105/2010 -:2:- accused has thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 307 IPC. 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 5 documents as Exts. P1 to P5 and two material objects as MOs. 1 and 2. 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 Assistant Sessions Judge, after trial, as per judgment dated 31.07.2006 found the revision petitioner guilty of the offence punishable under Section 307 I.P.C. and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- and on default to pay the fine, to suffer Crl.R.P. No. 105/2010 -:3:- simple imprisonment for six months. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the revision petitioner preferred an appeal before the Sessions Court, Palakkad as Crl. Appeal No. 534 of 2006. As per judgment dated 12.12.2008, the lower appellate court dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction entered and the sentence passed against the revision petitioner. Hence, this Revision. 6. Even though Adv. Sri. C.K. Jayakumar, the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner on State Brief 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. I do not think that having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the revision petitioner deserves incarceration for 7 years. The revision petitioner is Crl.R.P. No. 105/2010 -:4:- accordingly sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand only) and on default to pay the fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for four months. Set off, if any, under Section 428 Cr.P.C is allowed. In the result, this Revision is disposed of confirming the conviction entered but reducing the sentence of imprisonment to four years as above. Dated this the 1st day of March, 2010. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv A copy of this judgment shall be forwarded to the Superintendent, Central Prison, Kannur for information and compliance.