Kerala High Court
Suresh vs State Of Kerala on 5 November, 2024
CRL.REV.PET NO. 1272 OF 2016 1
2024:KER:82117
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.PRATHEEP KUMAR
TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 14TH KARTHIKA, 1946
CRL.REV.PET NO. 1272 OF 2016
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CRA NO.180 OF 2014 OF III
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT, THODUPUZHA
CC NO.227/11 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE
COURT, PEERMADE.
REVISION PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS/ACCUSED:
1 SURESH
S/O. SOMAN, KALLUMARICKAL HOUSE, 55TH MILE BHAGAM,
KARADIKKUZHI KARA, PEERUMADE VILLAGE.
2 KUMAR
S/O. AYYAPPAN, KULAKOTTIL HOUSE, 55TH MILE BHAGAM,
KARADIKKUZHI KARA, PEERUMADE VILLAGE.
3 JOHN
S/O. MUTHU, ROSY BHAVAN HOUSE, PATTUMUDI COLONY
PUTHUVEL, PATTUMUDI KARA, PEERUMADU VILLAGE.
4 ANILKUMAR
S/O. KUMARAN, KULAMKOTTIL HOUSE, 55TH MILE BHAGAM,
KARADIKKUZHI KARA, PEERUMADE VILLAGE.
BY ADV SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
OTHER PRESENT:
Smt.Maya.M.N., P.P.
CRL.REV.PET NO. 1272 OF 2016 2
2024:KER:82117
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 05.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.REV.PET NO. 1272 OF 2016 3
2024:KER:82117
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
----------------------------------------------------------
Crl.R.P.No.1272 of 2016
----------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 5th day of November, 2024
ORDER
This revision petition is filed by the accused in Criminal
Appeal No.180/2014 on the files of the III Additional Sessions
Court, Thodupuzha against the judgment dated 11.02.2016
sustaining the order of conviction passed by the Judicial First
Class Magistrate Court, Peermade in C.C.No.227/2011 under
Section 323 of the IPC and modifying the sentence to various
terms of imprisonment as well as fine.
2. The only argument raised by Sri.M.T.Suresh
Kumar, learned Counsel for the revision petitioners is to limit the
sentence to fine and to avoid substantive sentence of
imprisonment.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor was directed to
report whether there are other criminal cases against the revision
petitioners.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor produced the
report filed by the Station House Officer, Peermade Police Station
dated 04.11.2024 stating that there are no other criminal cases
against the revision petitioners. The report further states that the
2024:KER:82117
defacto complainant has no intention to proceed with the case.
5. In the light of the above report and considering
the fact that there are no other criminal cases against the revision
petitioners, I am inclined to take a lenient view in favour of the
revision petitioners and to limit substantive sentence to fine.
6. In the result this revision petition is allowed in
part as follows:
While sustaining the conviction, the sentence is modified
to payment of fine of Rs.1,000/- each under Section 323 Indian
Penal Code. The learned Counsel submitted that the revision
petitioners have already remitted the fine amount before the Trial
Court. However, there is no records before this court to confirm the
remittance of fine amount. In case it is not remited so far, revision
petitioners shall remit the fine amount within a period of one month
from today. In case of default, they shall undergo single
imprisonment for 15 days each.
sd/
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR
JUDGE
jm/
