IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2008 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1929 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 249 of 2008() --------------------------------- CRL.APPEAL NO. 246/2006 of SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM C.C. NO. 821/2004 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-III, PUNALUR REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------------ SANTHAMMA, AGED 64 YEARS, D/O.KARTHIYANI SINDHU VILASAM, NEAR KOIPURAM JUNCTION, CHAKKUVARAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI. K.SIJU RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE: ------------------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI. M.S. BREEZE, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR , J. ========================== Crl.R.P. No. 249 of 2008 ========================== Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2008. ORDER The revision petitioner, a woman, was charge sheeted by the Kunnikode police in crime No. 200 of 2004 for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 325 IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution was that the revision petitioner with the intention of causing grievous hurt to PW3, (Saradamma) had bitten on the lower ear lobe of the right ear of PW3 on 14.07.2004 at 9 a.m from the premises of Fousiya Cashew Factory where both of them were working and she has thereby committed the aforementioned offences. 3. The learned Magistrate after trial found the revision petitioner guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 341 and 326 IPC. For the conviction under Section 341 IPC, she was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one month and for the conviction under Section 326 IPC, she was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three months. The substantive sentence of imprisonment were directed to run concurrently. She was also ordered to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- by way of compensation to PW3 under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. CRL.R.P.NO. 249/2008 : 2: 4. On an appeal preferred by the revision petitioner as Crl.Appeal No. 246 of 2006 before the Sessions Court, Kollam, as per judgment dated 06.10.2007 passed by the Sessions Judge, the conviction of the revision petitioner was altered to one punishable under Sections 323 and 325 IPC. For the conviction under Section 325 IPC, she was sentenced to simple imprisonment for one month and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- and on default to pay the fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. No separate sentence was imposed for the conviction under Section 323 IPC. It is the said judgment which is assailed in this revision. 5. The conviction was entered by the courts below after a careful evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence in the case. Hence, this Court, sitting in revision, is not inclined to interfere with the conviction recorded by the lower appellate court. The conviction of the revision petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 325 IPC is accordingly confirmed. 6. What now survives for consideration is the adequacy or otherwise of the sentence imposed on the revision petitioner. On the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the revision petitioner deserves penal servitude by way of incarceration. Both of CRL.R.P.NO. 249/2008 : 3: them were co-workers in a Cashew Factory and the occurrence took place in a sudden altercation resulting in a fight. It was in the heat of passion that she bit off the lower lobe of the right ear of PW3. Hence, I am inclined to alter the sentence into imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay a compensation under Section 325 IPC. Accordingly, for the conviction under Section 325 IPC, the revision petitioner is sentenced to imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) by way of compensation to PW3 under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. 7. In the absence of an appeal or revision by the State, I am not inclined to impose any separate sentence for the conviction under Section 323 IPC. 8. The revision petitioner shall deposit the compensation within two months from today failing which she shall undergo imprisonment for two months by way of default sentence. This Revision is disposed of confirming the conviction but modifying the sentence as above. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv CRL.R.P.NO. 249/2008 : 4: