IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 27TH JUNE 2008 / 6TH ASHADHA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2099 of 2008() ------------------------------ CRA.801/2006 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-I), KOTTAYAM CC.381/2000 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, VAIKOM .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANTS/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------- 1. JAYAN @ THAMBAN, S/O. DASAN, MARALIYIL HOUSE, PATTATHANAM BHAGOM, KUDAVECHOOR KARA, VECHNOOR VILLAGE. 2. SABU, S/O. THANKAPPAN, MARALIYIL HOUSE, PATTATHANAM BHAGOM, KUDAVECHOOR KARA, VECHNOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SMT.P.MAYA RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI. C.M. NAZER, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR , J. ========================== Crl.R.P. No. 2099 of 2008 ========================== Dated this the 27th day of June, 2008. ORDER Heard both sides. 2. The revision petitioners who were accused Nos. 1 and 2 in C.C. No. 381 of 2000 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vaikom for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 506(ii), 294(b) and 353 r/w Section 149 IPC, challenge the conviction entered and the sentence passed against them under Section 143, 147, 294 (b), 353 and 506(ii) r/w Section 149 IPC. 3. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: PWs 1 to 6 are excise officials attached to the Excise Office, Vaikom. On 03.06.2000, at about 12.15 p.m., after their official duties they were returning to the Excise Office subsequent to the detection of an offence. When the excise party reached at Pattathanam junction in Sasthakulam Panchayat, the six accused persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of the said assembly, A1 brandished a sword stick by standing in front of the jeep in which the excise party was travelling and intimidated the prosecution withnesses causing fear of death. A2 uttered obscene words and caused annoyance to the Excise Party. A3 to A6 assisted Crl. R.P. No. 2099/2008 : 2: A1 and A2 in carrying out the aforesaid offences. The accused have thereby committed the aforementioned offences. 4. On the accused pleading not guilty to the charge 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 10 witnesses as PWs 1 to 10 and got marked 4 documents as Exts. P1 to P4. 5. After the close of the prosecution evidence, the accused was questioned under Section 313 (1)(b) Cr.P.C. with regard to the incriminating circumstances appearing 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. 6. The learned Magistrate, after trial, as per judgment dated 21.11.2006 acquitted accused Nos. 3 to 6, but convicted the revision petitioners/accused Nos. 1 and 2 of the offences referred to above and imposed simple imprisonment for one month under Section 143 r/w Section 149 IPC, simple imprisonment for six months under Section 147 r/w Section 149 IPC, simple imprisonment for one year under Section 148 r/w Section 149 IPC, simple imprisonment for one month Crl. R.P. No. 2099/2008 : 3: under Section 294(b) r/w Section 149 IPC, simple imprisonment for six months under Section 353 r/w Section 149 IPC and simple imprisonment for one year under Section 506(ii) r/w Section 149 IPC. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. Aggrieved by the said conviction, the revision petitioners preferred an appeal as Crl. Appeal No. 801 of 2006 before the Sessions Court, Kottayam who as per judgment dated 31.03.2008 allowed the appeal in part setting aside the conviction of A1 under Sections 148, 506(ii) and 294(b) r/w Section 149 IPC and setting aside the conviction of A2 under Sections 148 and 506(ii) IPC. With regard to the rest of the offences, the lower appellate court confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court. Hence, this Revision. 7. 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. Crl. R.P. No. 2099/2008 : 4: 8. What now survives for consideration is the question regarding the adequacy or otherwise of the sentence imposed on the revision petitioners. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the revision petitioners 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 hereinafter. Accordingly, the sentence imposed on the revision petitioners is set aside and instead each of them is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1000 (Rupees one thousand only) and on default to pay the fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month under Section 143 IPC, to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand only) and on default to pay the fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for two months under Section 147 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.3000/- (Rupees three thousand only) and on default to pay the fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for three months under Section 353 IPC. For the conviction under Section 294(b) IPC, the 2nd accused is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) and on default to pay the fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. Out of the fine, amount as and when realised, a sum of Rs.3000/- (Rupees three thousand only) shall be paid to PW1, a sum Crl. R.P. No. 2099/2008 : 5: of Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand only) shall be paid to PW9 and a sum of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) each shall be paid to PWs 1 to 4 as compensation under Section 357(1) Cr.P.C. The petitioners are given 45 days from today to deposit the fine amount before the trial court. In the result, this Revision is disposed of confirming the conviction entered but modifying the sentence imposed as above. Dated this the 27th day of June, 2008. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv Crl. R.P. No. 2099/2008 : 6: