IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 21ST FEBRUARY 2008 / 2ND PHALGUNA 1929 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 467 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRA.126/2007 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, ALAPPUZHA CC.822/2004 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT -I, ALAPPUZHA .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- 1. KISHORE, S/O.SASI, PUTHIYAPARAMBATH VEEDU, WARD 13, KANHIKKUZHI PANCHAYATH. 2. RAJESH, S/O.RAJAPPAN, PUTHIYAPARAMBATH VEEDU, WARD 13, KANHIKKUZHI PANCHAYATH. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. M.S. BREEZE THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl. R.P. No. 467 of 2008 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated: 21-2-2008 ORDER Petitioners have been concurrently convicted by the courts below for offences punishable under Sections 447, 324, 323 and 427 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summariased as follows:- On 2-5-2004 at about 5.45 a.m. In the courtyard of P.W.1 at Kanhikuzhy Panchayath in furtherance of their common intention to voluntarily cause hurt to P.W.1, the two accused persons armed with iron rods trespassed upon the courtyard of P.W.1 with iron rod and struck P.W.1 on her scalp with an iron rod and also smashed the tiles of the kitchen and uprooted the plantains causing a loss of Rs. 400/- to P.W.1. 2. On the accused pleading not guilty to the charge framed against him by the trial court, the prosecution was permitted to adduce evidence in support of its case. The prosecution examined 4 witnesses as P.Ws 1 to 4 and got marked Ext.P1 F.I. Statement. 3. The learned Magistrate, after trial, found both the revision -:2:- petitioners guilty of the offences charged against them and sentenced both to imprisonment for three months each under Secs. 449 and 324 I.P.C. and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- under Sec. 427 I.P.C and on default to pay the fine, to simple imprisonment for 15 days. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. 4. On appeal preferred by the petitioners as Crl. Appeal 126 of 2007 before the Sessions Court, Alappuzah, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court -II), Alappuzha dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction entered and the sentence passed against them. Hence this Revision. 5. Eventhough the learned counsel for the petitioners assailed on various grounds the conviction recorded against them, in as much as the conviction was recorded by the courts below after a careful evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence, this Court sitting in revision will be loathe to interfere with the said conviction which is accordingly confirmed. 6. What now survives for consideration is the question as to whether a proper sentence has been imposed on the petitioner. Except marking the F.I. Statement, even the F.I.R was not marked before the Court. Similarly, except the oral evidence tendered by P.W.1 and her neighbours, there was not even a wound certificate -:3:- produced nor any doctor examined to prove that P.W.1 sustained injuries as a result of the attack. It is the pre-existing civil dispute which is alleged to have impelled the accused persons to commit the offence. Having regard to the disposition of the parties and the nature of offence, I am inclined to hold that the petitioners do not deserve penal servitude by way of incarceration and that an appropriate fine and compensation shall meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, the sentence imposed on the petitioners under Sections 324 and 447 are set aside and instead, the petitioners are sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 2000/- under Section 427 and Rs. 500/- under Sec. 447 and Rs. 2,000/- under Section 324 I.P.C. On default to pay the fine of Rs. 2,000/- the petitioners shall undergo simple imprisonment for one month and on default to pay the fine of Rs. 500/- the petitioners shall suffer simple imprisonment for three days. From out of the fine amount, a sum of Rs. 5,000/- shall be paid to P.W.1 by way of compensation under Sec. 357 (1) Cr.P.C. The fine amount shall be deposited within one month from today. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE) -:4:- ani.