Loading...

Yahutty @ Ashraf vs State Of Kerala on 22 August, 2008

Kerala High Court
Yahutty @ Ashraf vs State Of Kerala on 22 August, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2854 of 2008()


1. YAHUTTY @ ASHRAF, S/O.MOHAMMED KUTTY,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.MOHAN PULIKKAL

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR

 Dated :22/08/2008

 O R D E R
                      V. RAMKUMAR, J.
                 ===================
                      Crl.R.P. No.2854 of 2008
                ====================
          Dated this the 22nd day of August, 2008.

                             O R D E R

In this revision filed under Section 397 read with Section

401 Cr.P.C., the petitioner who is the accused in C.C.

No.443/2002 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate,

Tirur for offences punishable under Sections 447 and 326 of

I.P.C challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed

against him for the aforementioned offences.

2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as

follows:

On account of the enmity which the accused was

nurturing against the family of PW1, on 14.1.2002 at about

10 a.m the accused criminally trespassed into the courtyard

of the house in which PW1 and her family members were

residing and voluntarily caused grevious hurt PW1 by hitting

her on the head with MO1 axe. The accused has thereby

committed the aforementioned offences.

3. On the accused pleading not guilty to the charge

CRL.R.P.NO.2854/08 .

2

framed against him by the trial court for the aforementioned

offences, the prosecution was permitted to adduce evidence in

support of its case. The prosecution altogether examined ten

witnesses as PWs 1 to 10 and got marked five documents as

Exts.P1 to P5 and an axe as MO1.

4. After the close of the prosecution evidence, the

accused was questioned under Section 313 (1)(b) Cr.P.C. with

regard to the incriminating circumstances appearing against him

in the evidence for the prosecution. He denied those

circumstances and maintained his innocence. He did not adduce

any defence evidence when called upon to do so.

5. The learned Magistrate, after trial, as per judgment

dated 28.11.2005 found the revision petitioner guilty of the

offences charged against him. For the conviction under Section

447 IPC, he was sentenced to S.I for one month. For the

conviction under Section 326 I.P.C, he was sentenced to S.I for

two years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,500/= and on default of

payment of fine, to suffer S.I for three months. The

CRL.R.P.NO.2854/08 .

3

substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently. On

appeal preferred by the revision petitioner as Crl.A.No.482/2005

before the Additional Sessions Court, Manjeri, as per the

judgment dated 14.7.2008 confirmed the conviction entered

against the revision petitioner but modified the sentence by

reducing the S.I to one year under Section 326 I.P.C. Hence,

this Revision.

6. Even though the learned counsel appearing for the

revision petitioner assailed on various grounds the conviction

entered against the revision petitioner, in as much as the

conviction has been recorded by the courts below concurrently

after a careful evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence

in the case, this Court sitting in revision will be loathe to interfere

with the said conviction which is accordingly confirmed.

7. What now survives for consideration is the question

regarding the adequacy or otherwise of the sentence imposed on

the revision petitioner. Having regard to the facts and

circumstances of the case, I do not think that the revision

petitioner deserves penal servitude by way of incarceration for

CRL.R.P.NO.2854/08 .

4

the said conviction. I am of the view that interests of justice will

be adequately met by imposing a sentence to be passed

hereinafter. Accordingly, for his conviction under Section 326

I.P.C the revision petitioner is sentenced to undergo

imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay a

compensation of Rs.15,000/= to PW1, the injured under

Section 357 (3) Cr.P.C. For his conviction under Section 447

I.P.C, the revision petitioner is sentenced to undergo

imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay a fine of

Rs.500/= and on default of payment of fine to suffer S.I for 4

months. The petitioner shall deposit the compensation as well

as the fine before the trial court within 45 days from today.

On default of payment of compensation, the petitioner shall

suffer S.I. for three months.

In the result, this Revision is disposed of confirming the

conviction entered but modifying the sentence imposed as above.

Dated this the 22nd day of August, 2008.

V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE.

rv

CRL.R.P.NO.2854/08         .
                      5




 cl

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information