IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 16TH MAGHA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3219 of 2007() ------------------------------ CRA.102/2007 of SESSIONS COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA CC.347/2003 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT -II,PATHANAMTHITTA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): --------------------- SEBASTIAN @ SHAJI C.NO. 9664 CENTRAL PRISON, TRIVANDRUM BY ADV. ADV.K.P.SUJEESH KUMAR (STATE BRIEF) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY A PUBLIC PROSECUTOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR P.R.JAYAKRISHNAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.R.P.NO.3219 OF 2007 ------------------------------------------ Dated 5th February 2009 O R D E R Revision petitioner is challenging his conviction and sentence from jail for the offence under Sections 506(i) and 447 of Indian Penal Code in C.C.347/2003 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Pathanamthitta as confirmed by Sessions Judge, Pathanamthitta in Crl.A.102/2007. While confirming the conviction learned Sessions Judge modified the sentence to rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 506(i) of Indian penal Code and two months for the offence under Section 447 of Indian Penal Code with a direction that sentence shall run concurrently. Revision was filed from jail on 13/8/2007 and revision petition was admitted on 11/9/2007. Maximum sentence of six months awarded for the offence under Section 506(i) of Indian Penal Code is over by 12/2/2008. Therefore, revision is only of academic interest. 2. State Brief appearing for revision petitioner CRRP 3219/07 2 was absent. 3. On going through the judgments of the courts below, I find no illegality warranting interference in exercise of the revisional jurisdiction. Learned Magistrate and learned Sessions Judge appreciated the evidence in the proper perspective. Evidence of PW1 corroborated by the evidence of PW2, the injured establish that on 1/8/2003 at mid night revision petitioner criminally trespassed into the property of PW1 and with the intention to cause grievous hurt threatened PW1 showing the handle of an axe and thereby committed offences under Sections 447 and 506(i) of Indian Penal Code. Conviction of revision petitioner on this evidence is perfectly legal. Learned Sessions Judge modified the sentence to rigorous imprisonment for six months and two months respectively for the offences under Sections 506(i) and 447 of Indian Penal Code. In such circumstances I find no reason to interfere with the sentence also. Revision petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.