IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 26TH AUGUST 2008 / 4TH BHADRA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 631 of 2007() ----------------------------- CRA.NO. 77 OF 2006 PF II ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE, PALAKKAD C.C. NO. 559 OF 2004 OF J.F.C.M. I, PALAKKAD REVN. PETITIONER: ------------------ ABDUL NAZAR @ MEERA MOIDEEN, C.NO.2351, CENTRAL JAIL, KANNUR BY ADV. ADV.SUJIT KUMAR.R.V(STATE BRIEF) RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.M. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. ````````````````` Crl.R.P. NO. 631 0f 2007 ````````````````` Dated: 26-08-2008 O R D E R In this revision preferred from the Central Prison, Kannur under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 Cr.P.C. the petitioner who is the accused in C.C. No.559 of 2004 on the file of the J.F.C.M.I, Palakkad for offences punishable under Sections 454, 380 and 461 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed concurrently for the aforementioned offences. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: On 7-4-2004 at about 3.30 p.m. the two accused persons broke open the front door of the residential house bearing No. XIII/469 of Elappully Panchayat where P.W.1 was residing along with his family and after breaking open the almirah kept in the bed room the accused persons committed theft of gold ear-studs weighing 2 grams and cash worth Rs. 6,000/-. The accused have thereby Crl.R.P. NO. 631 0f 2007 -:2:- committed offences punishable under Sections 454, 380 and 461 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. 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 7 witnesses as P.Ws 1 to 7 and got marked documents as Exts. P1 to P4 . A photograph together with negative of gold ingot was marked as MO1. 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 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 18-10-2005 found the revision petitioner guilty of the offences and sentenced him to simple Crl.R.P. NO. 631 0f 2007 -:3:- imprisonment for one year for the offence under Sec. 454 I.P.C. and a fine of Rs. 3,000/- and on default to pay the fine to suffer simple imprisonment for six months under Sec. 454 I.P.C., simple imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and on default to pay the fine to suffer simple imprisonment for six months under Sec. 380 I.P.C. and simple imprisonment for six months under Sec. 461 I.P.C. The 2nd accused was acquitted of all the offences. On appeal preferred by the revision petitioner as Crl.Appeal (Jail) No.77 of 2006 before the Sessions Court, Palakkad , the Addl. Sessions Judge, Palakkad as per judgment dated 25-10-2006 dismissed the appeal confirming the 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 Crl.R.P. NO. 631 0f 2007 -:4:- 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. Considering the fact that the petitioner is an accused in four other cases namely C.C. Nos. 288, 341, 398 and 597 of 2004 on the file of the J.F.C.M., Palakkad involving similar offences, I am not inclined to interfere with the sentence imposed on the revision petitioner. In the result, this Revision is disposed of confirming the conviction entered and the sentence passed against the revision petitioner. Dated this the 26th day of August 2008. V.Ramkumar, Judge.