IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 4TH JULY 2008 / 13TH ASHADHA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2213 of 2008() ------------------------------ CRA.186/2006 of VI ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM CC.1098/2001 of ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NO.1,2,3 & 4: -------------------------------------------------- 1. MANESH, AGED 24, S/O.DIVAKARAN, MUTTATHEPARAMBIL VEETTIL, KUNDANNOOR DESOM, MARADU VILLAGE. 2. CHANDRABOSE, AGED 40, S/O.KRISHNAN, MUTTATHEPARAMBIL VEETTIL, KUNDANNOOR DESOM, MARADU VILLAGE. 3. DIVAKARAN, AGED 53, S/O.KRISHNAN, MUTTATHEPARAMBIL VEETTIL, KUNDANNOOR DESOM, MARADU VILLAGE. 4. NALINI, AGED 50, W/O.DIVAKARAN, MUTTATHEPARAMBIL VEETTIL, KUNDANNOOR DESOM, MARADU VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.UDAYABHANU RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PANANGADU POLICE STATION IN(CR.116/00) REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.RAVINDRA BABU THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR, J. ====================================== CRL.R.P. NO.2213 OF 2008 ====================================== Dated this the 4th day of July 2008 ORDER Petitioners, who were accused Nos.1 to 4 in C.C.1098/2001 on the file of the Additional CJM, Ernakulam for offences punishable under Sections 447, 427, 341, 323, 324 and 326 read with section 34 IPC, challenge the conviction entered and sentence passed against them for offences punishable under Sections 447, 427 and 324 IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows:- On 11.6.2000 at about 7.45 p.m., the accused persons in furtherance of their common intention committed criminal trespass into the compound of the house of PW1 at Kundanoor Desom in Maradu Village and destroyed a portion of the northern compound wall belonging to PW1 causing a loss of Rs.1,500/- and CRRP 2213/2008 2 voluntarily caused hurt to PWs.1 and 2 by A1 cutting PW2 with a chopper and causing injuries to his head and 4 fingers and A2 hitting PW1 on the head with an iron rod A3 wrongfully restrained PW1 and beat him and PW2 with a wooden stick on several parts of their body and A1 kicked PWs. 1 and 2, while they were lying down with injuries. The accused have thereby committed offences punishable under Sections 447, 427, 341, 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 34 IPC. 3. On the accused pleading not guilty to the charge framed against them, by the trial court, for the aforementioned offences, the prosecution was permitted to adduce evidence in support of its case. The prosecution altogether examined seven witnesses as PWs 1 to 7 and got marked 6 documents as Exts.P1 to P6 and one material object as MO1. 4. After the close of the prosecution evidence, the accused were questioned under Section 313 (1)(b) Cr.P.C. with regard to the incriminating circumstances appearing CRRP 2213/2008 3 against them in the evidence for the prosecution. They denied those circumstances and maintained their innocence. They did not adduce any defence evidence when called upon to do so. 5. The learned Magistrate, after trial, as per judgment dated 2.2.2006 found the accused guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 324, 447 and 427 read with Section 34 IPC. A1 and A2 were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 324 and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and on default to pay the fine to suffer simple imprisonment for six months. All the 4 accused were each sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and on default to pay fine to suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days under Section 447 IPC. All the accused were sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and on default to pay the fine to suffer simple imprisonment for three months under Section 427 IPC. From out of the fine amount, a sum of Rs.20,000/- was directed to be paid to PW2 as compensation. The fine amount realised from the sentence CRRP 2213/2008 4 under Sections 447 and 427 IPC was directed to be paid to PW1. On appeal preferred by the revision petitioners as Crl.Appeal 186/2006 on the file of the Sessions Court, Ernakulam, the VIth Additional Sessions Judge, as per judgment dated 9/11/2007, dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction entered and the sentence passed against the revision petitioners. Hence, this Revision. 6. Even though the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners assailed on various grounds the conviction entered against the revision petitioners, in as much as the conviction has been recorded by the courts below concurrently after a careful evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence in the case, this Court sitting in revision will be loathe to interfere with the said conviction which is accordingly confirmed. 7. What now survives for consideration is as to whether the sentence imposed on the revision petitioners is proper or not. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the revision CRRP 2213/2008 5 petitioners 1 and 2 deserve penal servitude by way of incarceration for the said conviction. I am of the view that interests of justice will be adequately met by imposing a sentence to be passed hereunder with regard to A1 and A2. Accordingly, the sentence imposed on A1 and A2 for the conviction under Section 324 IPC is set aside and instead, A1 is sentenced to the imprisonment already undergone by him and A1 and A2 are each sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.15,000/- and on default to pay the fine to suffer simple imprisonment for three months under Section 324 IPC. From out of the total fine amount a sum of Rs.25,000/- shall be paid to PW2 by way of compensation under Section 357(1)(b) Cr.P.C. From out of the fine amount a sum of Rs.7,500/- shall be paid to PW1 as compensation under Section 357(1)(b) Cr.P.C. The sentence imposed on all the accused under Sections 447 and 427 IPC is not interfered with. This revision is disposed of accordingly, confirming the conviction but modifying the sentence as above. The petitioners shall deposit the fine CRRP 2213/2008 6 amount within two months from today. The first accused shall be released from prison forthwith unless his continued detention is found necessary in connection with any other case. His release shall, however, be subject to his liability to pay the fine, as aforesaid. Dated this the 4th day of July, 2008 V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE css/