Kerala High Court
Babukuttan Nair vs State Of Kerala on 8 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 18TH POUSHA, 1942
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.1722 OF 2010
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CRL.APPEAL NO. 846/2008 DATED 25-02-2010
OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (FAST TRACK-II), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CC NO.252/2005 DATED 25-09-2008 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,ATTINGAL
REVISION PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS/ACCUSED:
1 BABUKUTTAN NAIR, S/O.APPUKUTTAN NAIR,
SUBHAVILASAM VEEDU,
PADJNJATTU MUKKU DESOM,,
MENAMKULAM VILLAGE (A1).
2 MOHANAN NAIR, S/O.BHASKARAN NAIR
SUBHAVILASAM VEEDU,
PADJNJATTU MUKKU DESOM,,
MENAMKULAM VILLAGE (A1).
BY ADV. SRI.K.G.PAVITHRAN
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA,
REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.A.ANAS
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
08.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.1722 OF 2010
2
ORDER
Dated this the 8th day of January 2021
The revision petitioners are accused 1 and 2 in CC No.252 of
2005 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-1,
Attingal and the appellants in Crl.Appeal No.846 of 2008 on the
file of the Additional Sessions Court (Fast Track II),
Thiruvananthapuram. The offence alleged against the accused is
punishable under Section 354 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The prosecution case in brief is that, on 24.07.2004 at
about 5.30 p.m, the accused 1 and 2 due to previous enmity
towards PW2 in furtherance of their common intention rushed
towards PW2 and kicked on her right thigh questioning her as to
what was the difficulty for her for using loudspeaker in the nearby
temple near the Geethanjali Hospital owned and conducted by
PW2 at Padinjattumukku in Kadinamkulam Village and on seeing
it, when PW1 intervened the 2 nd accused fisted on her back,
caught hold of her blouse along with right forearm, tore off her
blouse and then caught hold of her hair and thereby the accused 1
and 2 had outraged the modesty of PWs 1 and 2.
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.1722 OF 2010
3. On appreciation of the evidence, the trial court
convicted and sentenced the accused 1 and 2 to undergo simple
imprisonment for three months each for the offence punishable
under Section 354 r/w 34 of the IPC. Challenging the conviction
and sentence, the accused preferred criminal Appeal before the
Additional Sessions Court (Fast Track II), Thiruvananthapuram.
By its judgment dated 25.02.2010, the learned Additional
Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction
and sentence imposed by the trial court.
4. When the case came up for consideration, accused 1 and 2
filed Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2020 to compound the offence under
Section 320 of the IPC. PW2, one of the victims, is no more. The
learned counsel for the revision petitioners handed over a copy of
the Death Certificate issued by the Department of Urban Affairs
to prove that PW2 passed away on 13.07.2015. The only surviving
victim is PW1. PW1 stated in the affidavit that Dr.Geetha, PW2 in
this case after conviction of the accused told him with repentance
that the case was instituted under the misunderstanding of facts.
PW1 further stated in the affidavit that the dispute has been
settled with him and sanction may be accorded to compound the
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.1722 OF 2010
case.
5. PW1 further submitted that on 27.04.2004, on the date
of occurrence he was working as Cook at the Geethanjali
Ayurveda Hospital owned and managed by PW2. It is clearly
stated in the affidavit that the disputes between the temple
authorities and PWs 1 and 2 have been finally settled and no
subsisting grievance is in existence at present. On going through
the facts of the case, it is clear that the occurrence took place in
connection with the user of a loudspeaker in the nearby temple
near Geethanjali Hospital owned and conducted by PW2 at
Padinjattumukku in Kadinamkulam Village. An element of moral
turpitude is absolutely lacks in this case. Hence, this is a fit case
for granting leave to compound the offence under Section 354 r/w
34 of the IPC.
6. Resultantly, Crl.M.A.No. 1 of 2020 stands allowed. The
revision petitioners/accused stand acquitted under Section
320(8) of the Cr.P.C. The Criminal revision petition is disposed
of accordingly.
Sd/- N.ANIL KUMAR, JUDGE
dlk/08.01.2021
