High Court Kerala High Court

Salim Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 July, 2007

Kerala High Court
Salim Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 July, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl Rev Pet No. 1055 of 2000()



1. SALIM KUMAR
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.D.PAUL DALIN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY

 Dated :30/07/2007

 O R D E R
                        J.B.KOSHY, J.
                  -------------------------
                   Crl.R.P.No.1055 OF 2000
                  -------------------------
                    Dated 30th July, 2007

                            ORDER

This revision petition is filed by the accused who

was convicted and sentenced under Section 324 of the Indian

Penal Code. The accused and PW1 were friends. On March 22,

1995 at about 7.15 p.m. the accused came to the house of PW1

and called him out. When they reached near the house of one

George, the accused took out a knife from his hip and stabbed

PW1 on his stomach causing grievous injury. Hearing the cry

of PW1, when PW2, PW3 and others came there, the accused ran

away. PW1 told PW2 that he was stabbed by the accused and he

fell into the hands of PW2. PW2 took PW1 to the Medical

Trust Hospital, Ernakulam. The weapon used for committing

the offence was found out on the basis of recovery under

Section 27 of the Evidence Act. PW9, the doctor who issued

Ext.P7 wound certificate deposed that there was incised wound

over right side of the abdomen. The Magistrate found that it

was not a grievous injury. Therefore, even though he was

charge sheeted for an offence committed under Section 326

IPC, he has committed only an offence under Section 324 IPC.

PW7 Investigating Officer also has filed a report altering

the charges to Section 324 IPC. The petitioner was convicted

Crl.R.P.1055/2000 2

and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year

for the offence under Section 324 IPC. The Sessions Court

confirmed the conviction and sentence. On going through

the evidence, I see no ground to interfere with the

conviction passed on the revision petitioner. Evidence of

injured witness was corroborated by other oral evidence as

well as recovery of the knife. There is no reason to alter

the conviction in a revision petition. It is submitted

that the incident occurred in 1995. The accused as well as

the injured were very young at that time and classmates.

Taking into account these aspects, I alter the sentence of

rigorous imprisonment for one year to a fine of Rs.10,000/=

with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for three

months. If the fine amount is realised, Rs.7,500/= shall

be given to PW1.

The Crl.R.P. is allowed to the above extent.

J.B.KOSHY
Judge

tks