IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 25TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 3RD ASWINA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1312 of 2005(D) ------------------------------ CRA.106/2001 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC), PATHANAMTHITTA CC.618/1998 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, PATHANAMTHITTA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED -------------------------------------------------- N.KRISHNA KUMAR, KRISHNA VILASOM, KOODAL P.O., KOODAL VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN SMT.R.DYANA RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT AND STATE ----------------------------------------------- 1. M.T.PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, SREEKAILAS, KALANJOOR P.O., ADOOR TALUK. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.MVS.NAMBOOTHIRY FOR R1 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. V.T.K. MOHANAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = CRIMINAL.R.P. NO. 1312 OF 2005 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 25th day of September, 2008. O R D E R This revision is preferred against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Pathanamthitta in Crl.A.106/01. The said appeal was preferred against the conviction and sentence passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I Pathanamthitta in C.C.618/98. The trial court found the accused guilty and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and also sentence to pay a fine of Rs.8,000/- as compensation to the complainant u/s 357(3) Cr.P.C. and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months more. The appellate court considered the materials and found that there is nothing to interfere with the conviction and sentence passed by the trial court and therefore confirmed the conviction and sentence. It is against that the revision is filed. Cr.R.P. 1312 OF 2005 -:2:- 2. A perusal of the judgments of both the Courts below and the records which is explained by the counsel appearing for both sides I do not find that there is anything to interfere with conviction passed by the Courts below. 3. So far as the sentence is concerned the revision petitioner prays for leniency and I had heard the counsel for the complainant as well. It is submitted that Rs.8,000/- is already deposited before the trial court as compensation. I feel leniency can be shown by altering the sentence from one of imprisonment and compensation u/s 357(3) to one of fine under the Act. It is sufficient that the revision petitioner is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.8,500/- and the complainant be paid an amount of Rs.8,000/- from the said fine amount u/s 357(3)Cr.P.C. The amount already in deposit can be considered as the fine amount and the balance need to be deposited. If the balance is not deposited, as a default sentence, the revision petitioner shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two weeks. The revision Cr.R.P. 1312 OF 2005 -:3:- petitioner is given time till 15th October, 2008 to remit the balance amount due as fine. 4. The trial court shall disburse the amount of Rs.8,000/- as ordered on deposit of the entire amount as expeditiously as possible. The Crl. Revision is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-