IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1353 of 2008()
1. SASIDHARAN, S/O.PONNAPPAN ASARI,
... Petitioner
2. VIDHYADARAN, S/O.MADHAVA PANICKER,
3. CHANDRAN, S/O.GANGADARAN PILLAI,
4. SANTHI ALIAS SUNI,
5. MURALIDHARAN NAIR,
6. GIRISH, S/O.PUZHPANGADAN,
7. RAJENDRAN NAIR, S/O.DAMODARAN PILLA,
8. JAYAKUMAR, S/O.NEELAKANTAPANICKER,
9. BAIJU, S/O.KRISHNANKUTTY,
10. ANILKUMAR, S/O.RAGHAVANPILLA,
11. SUNILKUMAR, S/O. RAGHAVANPILLA,
12. SUNILKUMAR, S/O.SADANANDAN,
13. SANTHOSH, S/O.SUKUMARA PANICKER,
14. SURESHKUMAR, S/O.SRIDHARA PANICKER,
15. DAMODARAN PILLA, S/O.VELAYUDHANPILLA,
16. SHIBUKUMAR, S/O.BALAKRISHNA PILLA,
17. JAYAKUMAR, S/O.VELAYUDHAN PILLA,
18. SUDARSHANAN, S/O.VASUPILLA,
19. PRIYAN, S/O.RAJAPPAPANICKER,
20. SURENDRAN, S/O.GOPALAN,
21. SUKUMARAN, S/O.GANGADHARAN PILLA,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.RENJITH B.MARAR
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR
Dated :29/05/2008
O R D E R
V. RAMKUMAR , J.
==========================
Crl.R.P. Nos. 1353, 1680, 1603
& 1354 of 2008
==========================
Dated this the 29th day of May, 2008.
ORDER
The revision petitioners in Crl.R.P. No. 1353 of 2008 are accused
Nos. 1,3 to 6 and 8 to 23 and the petitioners in Crl.R.P. No. 1354 of
2008 are accused Nos. 2 and 7 in C.C. No. 687 of 1997 on the file of
the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Attingal. The revision petitioners
in Crl.R.P. No. 1603 of 2008 are accused Nos. 1 to 15 and 19 to 23 in
C.C. No. 689 of 1997 on the file of the aforesaid Magistrate’s court.
The petitioners in Crl.R.P. No. 1680 of 2008 are accused Nos. 17 and
18 of C.C. No. 689 of 1997 of the said court.
2. The case of the prosecution is that all the 23 accused persons
in furtherance of their common object to criminally trespass upon the
property possessed by the PW1 situated at Kallikadu in Koliakode
village and cut open a road, formed themselves into an unlawful
assembly and in a prosecution of the common object of the said
assembly, trespassed upon the said property and caused extensive
damage to the property. The date of occurrence in C.C. No. 687 of
1997 is 23.07.1997 and the date of occurrence in C.C. No. 689 of
1997 is 21.07.1997. The alleged loss caused on account of the
mischief committed in C.C. No. 689 of 1997 has been valued at
Crl.R.P. Nos. 1353, 1680, 1603 :2:
& 1354 of 2008
Rs.25,000/- and that of C.C. No. 687 of 1997 has been valued at
Rs.50,000/-. C.C. Nos. 687 of 1997 and 689 of 1997 were separately
tried by the learned Magistrate. In both the cases, the learned
Magistrate after trial and after an exhaustive evaluation of the oral and
documentary evidence in the case, found the revision petitioners guilty
of the offences alleged against them and sentenced each of them to
simple imprisonment for six months under Sections 143, 147 and 427
r/w Section 149 IPC and to simple imprisonment for three months
under Section 447 r/w Section 149 IPC in each of the cases.
3. On appeal preferred by the revision petitioners before the
Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram, the Additional Sessions Judge,
Fast Track-I, Thiruvananthapuram, as per common judgment dated
11.09.2007, dismissed the appeals confirming the conviction entered
and the sentence passed against the revision petitioners. Hence these
revisions.
4. Even though the learned counsel appearing for the revision
petitioners assailed on various grounds the conviction recorded against
the revision petitioners, in as much as the conviction has been
recorded after a careful evaluation of the oral and documentary
evidence in the case, this Court sitting in revision will be loath to
Crl.R.P. Nos. 1353, 1680, 1603 :3:
& 1354 of 2008
interfere with the said conviction. Both the courts have carefully
evaluated the oral and documentary evidence to record the conviction
against the revision petitioners. In the absence of any infirmity in the
appreciation of evidence by the courts below, this Court sitting in
revision will not interfere with the said conviction much less dislodge
the same. Accordingly, the conviction recorded against the revision
petitioners is confirmed.
5. What now survives for consideration is the adequacy or
otherwise of the sentence imposed on the revision petitioners. Having
regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that
the petitioners deserve penal servitude by way of incarceration. I am
satisfied that an appropriate fine and compensation therefrom to PW1
will meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, the sentence imposed on
the revision petitioners is set aside and instead each of them is
sentenced to pay a fine of RS.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) each
under Sections 143 and 147 r/w Section 149 IPC in each of the two
cases. On failure to pay the fine, the defaulting accused shall suffer
simple imprisonment for one month. For the conviction under Sections
447 and 427 r/w Section 149 IPC, each of the revision petitioners is
sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and Rs.2000/- respectively in
Crl.R.P. Nos. 1353, 1680, 1603 :4:
& 1354 of 2008
each of the cases. On failure to pay the fine, the defaulting accused
shall undergo simple imprisonment for two months. The petitioners
are given 45 days from today to deposit the fine amount before the
trial court. From out of the fine amount, a sum of Rs.65,000/-
(Rupees sixty five thousand only) shall be paid to the complainant in
C.C. No. 687 of 1997 and a sum of Rs.35,000/- (Rupees thirty five
thousand only) shall be paid to the complainant in C.C. No. 689 of
1997 by way of compensation under Section 357(1) Cr.P.C.
In the result, these revisions are disposed of confirming the
conviction entered but modifying the sentence as above.
V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE.
rv
Crl.R.P. Nos. 1353, 1680, 1603 :5:
& 1354 of 2008