IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl Rev Pet No. 719 of 1998()
1. BABY
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.R.UDAYABHANU
Dated :05/03/2007
O R D E R
K.R.UDAYABHANU, J
---------------------------------------------
CRL.R.P.No.719 of 1998
---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 5th day of March, 2007
ORDER
Revision petitioners stand convicted for the offence under
Sections 324, 326 read with 34 IPC and sentenced, as modified
by the appellate court, to undergo simple imprisonment for six
months each and to pay a fine of Rs.1,500/- each under Section
326 IPC and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one
month each. They are also sentenced to undergo simple
imprisonment for three months each for the offence under
Section 324 IPC. It was also directed that out of the fine
amount, if realised, Rs.2,000/- will be paid to PW2 the victim.
2. The prosecution case is that on 16.4.1995, at about
5.30 p.m., PW2 was waiting in the bus stop. The accused
approached him and dragged him to a certain distance and A1
hit on his head with a granite stone sheathed in a cloth and A2
repeatedly beat on his head with a stick. The stick is produced as
MO1 and the stone and the cloth with which the stone was
covered is produced as MO2. As a result of the attack, PW2
CRRP719/98 Page numbers
sustained depressed fracture on the left side of the paretal bone
and contusions on different parts of the body. The evidence of
prosecution consisted of the testimony of PW’s 1 to 9, Exts. P1 to
P6 and material objects i.e, MO1 and MO2 series. PWs 1 and 2
are the eye witnesses to the entire incident and PW3 is the
doctor, who issued Ext. P3 wound certificate wherein it is
mentioned that on C.T. scan, extra dural haemerage was
detected inside the left parietal region. PW2, the injured has
immediately taken to the hospital. The wound certificate was
recorded at 6.30 P.M. The only major contention raised is that
CW3 another occurrence witness, who took the injured to the
hospital, was not examined. The courts below have considered
the above contention and discarded the same in view of the
evidence of PW’s 1 and 2 that appeared trustworthy and
credible. It was also pointed out that there is no motive alleged.
PW2 injured has stated that the accused abused, after getting
fully drunk, from in front of the house of PW2 and that PW2 have
questioned the same. The evidence of PW2 is to the effect that
he has been rendered invalid on account of the consequences of
CRRP719/98 Page numbers
the injury sustained. It is also to be noted that no omissions or
contradictions in the evidence of PWs 1 and 2 were brought out
with respect to the previous statement through the evidence of
PW9, the investigating officer. It was further pointed out that
there is nothing overt act by A2 in relation to the offence under
Section 326 IPC is alleged. It is pointed out that although it
charged that PW2 was beaten with a stick, there is no
corresponding injury. I find that in Ext. P2 wound certificate
contusion on the body is noted. Although common intention is
alleged taking into consideration, the details of the incident as
alleged, I find that A2 is liable to be acquitted with respect to
the offence under Section 326 IPC. All the same the finding that
he is guilty for the offence under Section 324 is not liable to be
set aside. In the circumstances, the conviction with respect to
A1 is limited to the offence under Section 326 IPC and A2 with
respect to the offence under Section 324 IPC. No other overt act
except hitting with the stone is alleged against A1.
3. The counsel for the revision petitioner has pleaded for
leniency pointing out that the incident has taken place about 13
CRRP719/98 Page numbers
years back and so far as the revision petitioners were living
under the shadow of impending imprisonment.
4. In the circumstances, sentence is modified with
respect to A1 to undergo simple imprisonment for four months
and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default, to undergo simple
imprisonment for three months. The sentence on A2 is reduced
to a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to undergo simple
imprisonment for three months. The fine amount, if realised, will
be paid to PW2.
The Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of as above.
K.R.UDAYABHANU,
JUDGE
csl
CRRP719/98 Page numbers
K.R.UDAYABHANU, J
Crl.R.P.No.929 of 1997
CRRP719/98 Page numbers
ORDER
26th February, 2007
CRRP719/98 Page numbers