IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2008 / 14TH JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 271 of 2000() ----------------------------- CRA.29/1995 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, KOTTAYAM CC.562/1987 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KOTTAYAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER: ------------------ KUNJUKUNJU ALIAS KUTTY, S/O. YOHANNAN, PUTHUVALIL VEEDU, PANNIMATTOM BHAGOM, CHANNANICADUKARA, PANACHIKKAD VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.JACOB ABRAHAM SMT.KOCHUMOL KODUVATH SMT.K.BHAGYAM SMT.M.C.BINDUMOL RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.M. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. ````````````````` Crl. R.P. NO. 271 of 2000 ````````````````` Dated: 4-6-2008 O R D E R The Revision Petitioner was the accused in C.C. 562 of 1987 on the file of the J.F.C.M.I, Kottayam charged for offences punishable under Sections 456 and 354 I.P.C. challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him by the courts below for offences punishable under Sections 456 and 354 I.P.C. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: On 20-08-1987 at about 1 a.m. the accused trespassed into the house of P.W.1 Geethamma situated on the southern side of Chandanikkad-Pannimattam road and stealthily laid over her and tried to molest her while she was sleeping on a mat and thereby committed the offences punishable under Sections 456 and 354 I.P.C. 3. On the accused pleading not guilty to the charge Crl.R.P. 271 of 2000 -:2:- framed against him by the trial court for the aforementioned offences, the prosecution was permitted to adduce evidence in support of its case. The prosecution altogether examined 9 witnesses as P.Ws 1 to 9 and got marked 4 documents as Exts. P1 to P4 and one material object as MO 1. 4. After the close of the prosecution evidence, the accused was questioned under Sec. 313 (1)(b) Cr.P.C. with regard to the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the evidence for the prosecution. He denied those circumstances and maintained his innocence. He did not adduce any defence evidence when called upon to do so. 5. The learned Magistrate, after trial, as per judgment dated 5th January 1994 found the revision petitioner guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 456 and 354 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for one year under Sec. 354 and simple imprisonment for six months under Sec. 456 I.P.C. with a direction that the sentences shall run concurrently. On appeal preferred by the revision petitioner before the Sessions Court , Kottayam the lower appellate court as per judgment dated 29th December 1999 confirmed the Crl.R.P. 271 of 2000 -:3:- conviction entered and the sentence passed against the revision petitioner. Hence, this Revision. 6. Eventhough the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner assailed on various grounds the conviction entered against the revision petitioner, 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 the question regarding the adequacy or otherwise of the sentence imposed on the revision petitioner. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the revision petitioner deserves penal servitude by way of incarceration for the said conviction. I am of the view that interest justice will be adequately met by imposing a sentence to be passed hereinafter. Accordingly, the sentence imposed on the revision petitioner is set aside and instead he is sentenced to imprisonment till rising of the court and to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as fine and on default to pay fine to suffer simple Crl.R.P. 271 of 2000 -:4:- imprisonment for three months under Sec. 354 I.P.C. and imprisonment till rising of the court and to pay fine of Rs. 4,000/- and on default to pay the fine simple imprisonment for two months under Sec. 456 I.P.C. From out of the fine amount a sum of Rs. 7,500/- shall be paid to P.W.1 as compensation under Sec. 357 (1) Cr.P.C. The petitioner shall deposit the fine amount before the trial court within forty five days from today. In the result, this Revision is disposed of confirming the conviction entered but modifying the sentence imposed as above. V.Ramkumar, Judge. ani.