Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS FRIDAY, THE21T DAY OF FEBRUARY20142ND PHALGUNA, 1935 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 337 of 2014 () ------------------------------- CRL.APPEAL NO.424/2011 of 1ST ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT, THRISSUR CC13052007 of J.M.F.C.,IRINJALAKUDA REVISION PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS/ACCUSED: --------------------------------------------- 1. RAJESH S/O.VELANDI, KUTTASSAMVEETIL, VELLANI DESOM KARALAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
2. SUMESH, S/O.SOMAN, KARIYIL HOUSE, KARALAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.V.BINOY RAM SMT.SAJITHA P.SOMAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM682031 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.BINDU GOPINATH. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON1902-2014, THE COURT ON2102.2014 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, J.
----------------------------------------------- Crl.R.P. No.337 of 2014 ----------------------------------------------- Dated 21st February, 2014 ORDER
This Criminal Revision Petition is filed by accused Nos.1 and 2 in C.C.No.1305 of 2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Irinjalakkuda, challenging the conviction and sentence under Sections 448, 341 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The prosecution case is that accused Nos.1 and 2 with their common intention to cause hurt to PW1, trespassed into the veranda of his house and wrongfully restrained PW1 and caused hurt to him by beating with hands. The trial court convicted accused Nos.1 and 2 under Sections 448, 323 and 341 and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each for the offences under Sections 448 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one month each for the offence under Section 341 of the I.P.C. Against that conviction and sentence, accused Nos.1 and 2 filed Crl.Appeal No.424 of 2011 before the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Thrissur, which was dismissed. Crl.R.P. No.337 of 2014 2 Against that judgment, the appellants/accused filed this Criminal Revision Petition.
3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners submitted that the revision petitioners are not challenging their conviction under Sections 448, 323 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code and that the only prayer is to convert the jail sentence into fine, considering the fact that they are first offenders.
4. The courts below convicted both the accused for the offences, after properly appreciating the evidence on record. Therefore, I find no reason to interfere with the conviction.
5. For the offence under Sections 448, 323 and 341 of the I.P.C., jail sentence is not mandatory. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that sentencing the accused Nos.1 and 2 to pay a fine of `1,000/- each under Sections 448 and 323 of the I.P.C. and to pay a fine of `500/- each under Section 341 would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Petition is allowed Crl.R.P. No.337 of 2014 3 in part. The conviction of accused Nos.1 and 2 in C.C.No. 1305 of 2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Irinjalakkuda under Sections 323, 341 and 448 of the Indian Penal Code is confirmed. Accused Nos.1 and 2 are sentenced to pay a fine of `1,000/- each under Section 323 of the I.P.C., in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month each. They are also sentenced to pay fine of `500/- each under Section 341 of the I.P.C., in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one week each. They are also sentenced to pay fine of `1,000/- each under Section 448 of the I.P.C., in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month each. Three months' time is granted to the revision petitioners to remit the fine amount before the trial court. Sd/- M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE. tgs (true copy)