High Court Kerala High Court

V.Bhaskaran Nambiar vs V.Balakrishnan Nambiar on 1 March, 2007

Kerala High Court
V.Bhaskaran Nambiar vs V.Balakrishnan Nambiar on 1 March, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl Rev Pet No. 214 of 1998()



1. V.BHASKARAN NAMBIAR
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. V.BALAKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.RAMKUMAR NAMBIAR

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.R.UDAYABHANU

 Dated :01/03/2007

 O R D E R
                          K.R. UDAYABHANU, J

              =================================

                      CRL. R.P. NO.  214 OF 1998

              =================================

                Dated this the 1st day of March 2007




                                  O R D E R

The revision petitioner is the complainant in C.C. No.230/96

with respect to the offences under sections 323, 324 r/w section

34 of the Indian Penal Code. The court below acquitted the the

accused after considering the evidence adduced in the matter

which consisted of the testimony of PWs 1 to 9 and Exts. P1 to

P4. The allegation is that on 20.09.1994 at about 8.15 am the

accused were found encroaching into the property of the sister of

CW1, the complainant and when obstructed, was attacked and

inflicted injuries on the defacto complainant and CW2. The direct

evidence is the testimony of PW1 alone. It is admitted by the

Investigating Officer that the incident occurred on account of a

boundary dispute. There was also a counter case with respect to

the same incident. The weapons of the offence were not

recovered. It was also found that only very minor injuries were

CRL. R.P. NO. 214 OF 1998

: 2 :

sustained by PW1. It was found that the injury sustained by the

witnesses in the counter case is more serious than the injuries

sustained by the petitioner. On appreciation of the evidence

adduced in the matter, the court below found that the

prosecution has failed to establish the charge.

2. On a consideration of the evidence adduced in the

matter I find that on the solitary evidence of PW1 alone, it is not

possible to enter a finding as to who was the real aggressor. In

the circumstances, I find no reason to interfere in the findings of

the court below.

The Crl.R.P is dismissed accordingly.

K.R. UDAYABHANU, JUDGE.

RV

CRL. R.P. NO. 214 OF 1998

: 3 :