IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2008 / 2ND ASHADHA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2387 of 2006(C) ------------------------------ CRA.395/2004 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-III), KASARAGODE CC.203/1999 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KASARAGOD .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ACCUSED ----------------------------------------------- T.P.MUTHALIB, S/O.T.P.AHABADAJI, BAVIKKARA, MULIYAR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.I.V.PRAMOD RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA-REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI. P. RAVINDRA BABU, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.NISHIL.P.S. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL. R.P.NO. 2387/2006 : 2 : ORDER ON CRL. M.A.NO. 6693/2006 IN CRL. R.P.NO. 2387/2006 DISMISSED 23.06.2008 sd/- V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. V. RAMKUMAR, J. =================== Crl.R.P. No. 2387 of 2006 ==================== Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2008. O R D E R In this revision filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C., the petitioner who was the 1st accused in C.C. No.203 of 1999 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kasaragod for an offence punishable under Section 326 r/w Section 34 IPC, challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him concurrently by the courts below. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: On 03.12.1998, at 11.30 a.m., due to their previous enemity towards PW3 and in furtherance of their common intention to attack PW3, A1 chased him with MO1 'Valankathi' and A2 and A3 chased him with draggers and A1 notched on the right leg with 'Valankathi' and A2 and A3 stabbed PW3 on his leg and abdomen with dragger from the property belonging to Mulliyar Forest in Mulliyar village and as a result of notching by A1 to A3, PW3 sustained grievous injuries. CRL.R.P. NO. 2387/2008 :2: 3. The revision petitioner/1st accused alone faced trial. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 are absconding. On the revision petitioner/1st 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 6 witnesses as PWs 1 to 6 and got marked 4 documents as Exts. P1 to P4 and one 'Valankathi' was marked as MO1. 4. After the close of the prosecution evidence, the accused was questioned under Section 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 30.10.2004 found the revision petitioner guilty of the offences and sentenced him to simple imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- and on default pay the fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for three months. The fine amount CRL.R.P. NO. 2387/2008 :3: was directed to be paid to PW1 (which may mistake for PW3, the injured). On appeal preferred by the revision petitioner as Crl. Appeal No. 395 of 2004 before the Sessions Court, Kasaragod, the lower appellate court as per judgment dated 23.05.2006 dismissed the appeal. Hence, this Revision. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that on the facts and circumstance of the case, the offence which is made out against the petitioner is only one punishable under Section 324 IPC since the injuries which were sustained by PW3 as a result of notching by the revision petitioner with MO1 are a punctured wound on the right thigh and an incised wound over the left ankle. Going by the description of those injuries in Ext.P1 wound certificate, I see some force in the said submission because those are the injuries which PW3 sustained as revealed by Ext.P1 wound certificate and the evidence of PW3 on account of notching by the revision petitioner with MO1. Both these injuries cannot be described as grievous injuries though they have been inflicted with a dangerous weapon. Hence the conviction recorded against the petitioner is CRL.R.P. NO. 2387/2008 :4: altered into one punishable under Section 324 IPC and the conviction recorded under Section 326 IPC is set aside. 7. Pending this revision, PW3, the injured and the revision petitioner have compounded the matter and have filed a joint petition to that effect as Crl. M.A No. 5904 of 2008. The composition is recorded and it will have the effect of an acquittal of the revision petitioner of the offence punishable under Section 324 IPC in view of Section 320(8) Cr.P.C. This Crl.R.P. is disposed of as above. Dated this the 20th day of June, 2008. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv