IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 30TH MAGHA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 681 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRA.11/2005 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)III, TRIVANDRUM CC.8/2002 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, NEDUMANGAD .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 1 TO 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. PODIYAN, S/O. POULOSE, JOLLY BHAVAN, MADANKARIKKAKOM, IDINJAR, ANAD MURI, PERINGAMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. MANIYAN, S/O. POULOSE, MADANKARIKKAKOM, MANDAPAM, IDINJAR, ANAD MURI, PERINGAMALA VILLAGE. 3. THAMPI, S/O. SOLOMAN, MADANKARIKKAKOM, MANDAPAM, IDINJAR, ANAD MURI, PERINGAMALA VILLAGE. 4. JOY, S/O. THAMPI, MADANKARIKKAKOM, MANDAPAM, IDINJAR, ANAD MURI, PERINGAMALA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER CRRP NO.681 OF 2009 2 RESPONDENT(S): STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. NANI, D/O. NEELU, KARIKKAKOM MANPURATHU VEEDU, IDINJAR, ANAD, PERINGAMALA VILLAGE. 3. SAVITHRI, D/O. NANI, KARIKKAKOM MANPURTH VEEDU, IDINJAR, ANAD, PERINGAMALA VILLAGE. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAYAKRISHNAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.R.P.No.681 of 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 19 th day of February, 2009 ORDER The petitioners, who are the accused in C.C.No.8 of 2002 on the file of the J.F.C.M-1, Nedumangad, challenge the conviction entered and the sentence passed against them concurrently by the courts below for offences punishable under Sections 452 and 324 read with 34 IPC. 2. Pending this revision, the injured who are Pws1 and 2 have compounded the offences with the revision petitioners and a joint petition has been filed as Crl.M.A.No.2022 of 2009. Since the offence punishable under Section 452 IPC is not compoundable, the composition with regard to the said offence cannot be accepted. With regard to Section 324 IPC, the said offence is no more compoundable in the light of the amendment to Section 320 Cr.P.C. However, since the said offence was compoundable on the date of commission of offence, in the light of the decision in Abdul Sufan Laskar v. State of Assam (2008(4) KLT SN1- Case No.2), the said offence can be permitted to be compounded. Accordingly, the composition with regard to the offence punishable under Section 324 IPC is recorded and it will have the effect of an aquittal in view of Section 320(8) Cr.P.C. 3. What now survives for consideration is the offence punishable under Section 452 IPC. The offence punishable Crl.R.P.No.681 of 2009 2 under Section 452 IPC will be attracted only if house trespass is committed for the purpose of committing hurt or assault or for wrongly restraining any person. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners committed house trespass for the purpose of assaulting PWs1 and 2. Since the offence punishable under Section 324 IPC has been permitted to be compounded and the revision petitioners/accused have been acquitted of the said offence, there cannot be any criminal trespass or house trespass for the purpose of committing the offence punishable under Section 324 IPC. Hence, the conviction for the offence punishable under Section 452 IPC is set aside. In the result, this Crl.R.P. is disposed of and the revision petitioners will stand acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 452 IPC. This Crl. R.P. is disposed of as above. Dated this the 19th day of February, 2009. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj