IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl Rev Pet No. 1890 of 2005(A)
1. AZEEZ, S/O.IBRAHIM,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE-S.I. OF POLICE,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.R.UDAYABHANU
Dated :09/03/2007
O R D E R
K.R. UDAYABHANU, J
=================================
CRL. R.P. NO. 1890 OF 2005
=================================
Dated this the 9th day of March 2007
O R D E R
The revision petitioner stands convicted for the offence
under section 482 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to
undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of
Rs.1000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one
month. The prosecution case is that the accused Nos. 1 to 5
were found in possession of a Jeep having registration No. KLM-
7137 on 18.05.1993 with a false Number plate i.e., KLV-378.
The original number is KLM 7137. The RC book carrying KLV 378
was also found in possession of the accused. The structure of the
jeep was found altered by fitting tanks unauthorisedly.
2. The evidence adduced in the matter consisted of the
testimony of PWs 1 to 7 and Exts. P1 to P7. It was found that
the vehicle seized is not the one having registration number KLV-
378 and that KLV-378 vehicle is registered in the name of
Inspector General of Police at Thiruvananthapuram, and the
CRL. R.P.NO. 1890 OF 2005 : 2 :
same is also evidenced from the chasis number and engine
number seen in the vehicle. It was also found that chasis
number and engine number did not belong to the vehicle having
registration No. KLV-378. The revision petitioner is the 1st
accused and the rest of the accused were acquitted by the trial
court itself. It is the contention of the counsel for the revision
petitioner that there is absolutely no evidence to connect the 1st
accused with the ownership of the vehicle seized. According to
him, he has no connection with the vehicle. The only evidence to
establish that he is the owner of the vehicle is the testimony of
PW4 the Investigating Officer. He has deposed that he
questioned the Joint R.T.O and that the Joint R.T.O has stated
that A1 is the owner of the vehicle having Registration No. KLM-
7137. The above is the only evidence to arrive at the finding that
A1is the owner of the vehicle having Registration No. KLM-7137
which is the seized vehicle and on which the false registration
number was found installed. Evidently, the above version of PW4
is in the nature of hearsay and the sole basis of the finding is the
version of PW4. In the circumstances, it cannot be held that the
CRL. R.P.NO. 1890 OF 2005 : 3 :
prosecution has established the guilt of the accused beyond
reasonable doubts. I find that the court below have not
considered the evidence adduced in the proper perspective. In
the circumstances, the findings of the courts below are set aside.
The accused is acquitted.
The Revision petition is allowed accordingly.
K.R. UDAYABHANU, JUDGE.
RV
CRL. R.P.NO. 1890 OF 2005 : 4 :