IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2010 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 888 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRA.450/2008 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, PALAKKAD CC.433/2005 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, ALATHUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- MANIKANDAN, SON OF APPUCHAMI, THACHAKKODU, ELAVAMPADAM, KIZHAKKANCHERRY, ALATHUR. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PREM SMT.K.P.SANTHI SRI.P.K.NIJOY SMT.NISHA G.THARAMAL RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. C.M. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. ````````````````` Crl.R.P. NO. 888 of 2010 ````````````````` Dated: 17-3-2010 O R D E R In this revision filed under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 Cr.P.C. the petitioner who is the accused in C.C. No.433 of 2005 on the file of the J.F.C.M., Alathur for offences punishable under Section 324 I.P.C. challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him for the aforementioned offence. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: On 19-4-2005 at about 11 a.m. on account of his previous enmity towards the de facto complainant/P.W.1 (Damayanthi) the accused assaulted her with a spade resulting in her sustaining an incised injury to the left forearm. The accused has thereby committed the above offence. 3. 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 6 witnesses as P.Ws 1 to 6 and got marked 3documents as Exts. P1 to P3and the handle of a spade as MO1. Crl.R.P. NO. 888 of 2010 -:2:- 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 27-6-2008 found the revision petitioner guilty of the offence punishable under Sec. 324 I.P.C. and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- and on default to pay the fine to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. From out of the fine a sum of Rs. 3,000/- was directed to be paid to P.W.1 the injured under Sec. 357 (1) (b) Cr.P.C. On appeal preferred by the revision petitioner as Crl. Appeal No. 450 of 2008 before the Sessions court, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Tract - II) as per judgment dated 4-1-2010 dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him. 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 Crl.R.P. NO. 888 of 2010 -:3:- 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, for his conviction under Section Sec. 324 I.P.C. the Revision Petitioner is sentenced to imprisonment till rising of Court and to pay a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) to P.W.1 the injured and Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) to the State. The compensation shall be deposited before the trial Court within 45 days failing which he shall suffer simple imprisonment for one month by way of default sentence. In the result, this Revision is disposed of confirming the conviction entered but modifying the sentence imposed as above. Sd/-V.Ramkumar, Judge. ani /true copy/ Crl.R.P. NO. 888 of 2010 -:4:-