Kerala High Court
Manoj vs State Of Kerala on 15 November, 2024
2024:KER:86764
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 24TH KARTHIKA, 1946
CRL.REV.PET NO.342 OF 2021
AGGREIVED BY THE JUDGMENT DATED 29.03.2021 IN CRL.APPEAL NO.58
OF 2020 ON THE FILES OF THE ADDITIONAL SESSION'S COURT - III,
KASARAGOD AND THE JUDGMENT DATED 07.03.2020 IN C.C. NO.3003 OF
2014 ON THE FILES OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE'S COURT
- I, KASARAGOD
REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
MANOJ
AGED 45 YEARS
S/O.LATE SASIDHARAN, RESIDING AT DOOR NO.20/197-H
(VA) OF KUMBLA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, FISHERIES COLONY,
KOYIPPADY VILLAGE, MANJESHWAR TALUK, KUMBLA P.O.,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671 321.
BY ADVS.
T.MADHU
C.R.SARADAMANI
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KUMBLA POLICE STATION,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT- 671 321.
SRI. C.N. PRABHAKARAN-P.P.
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 15.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:86764
2
Crl.R.P.No.342 of 2021
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, J.
-----------------------------------------------------
Crl.R.P.No.342 of 2021
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 15th day of November, 2024
ORDER
In this revision petition filed under Section 397 read with 401
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner challenges
his conviction and sentence for an offence punishable under
Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Although the trial court
convicted him for an offence punishable under Section 324 of the
IPC, the appellate court modified it by altering the conviction and
also the sentence.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Senior Public Prosecutor.
3. The injured is the stepmother of the petitioner.
Allegations were that while they were residing together, at about
10.30 p.m on 14.05.2014, the petitioner abused the injured - PW1
and beat her using a reaper thereby inflicting an injury at her right
wrist. Besides the injured, seven more witnesses were examined
by the prosecution to prove the charge. Exts.P1 to P7 were proved
and MO1 was identified. PW1 deposed in detail regarding the
incident. PW2 a neighbor also deposed regarding the incident. He
2024:KER:86764
explained that on hearing a hue and cry from the house of PW1,
he went there and saw the petitioner beating PW1 using a stick.
4. PW6 is the doctor who examined PW1 and issued Ext.P6
wound certificate. An injury was noticed on the body of PW1 by
PW6 which was entered in the wound certificate. A doubt about the
cause of injury was raised but the trial court explained away the
doubt and held that the injury noticed on the body of PW1 was
inflicted as a result of the attack by the petitioner. Believing the
oral testimonies of PWs 1 and 2, the trial court held that the
petitioner was liable for conviction for the offence under Section
324 of the IPC.
5. The appellate court re appreciated the evidence and
came to the conclusion that the weapon used by the petitioner to
inflict injury, MO1 was not a dangerous one coming within the
description contained in Section 324 of the IPC. Accordingly,
conviction was altered to one under Section 323 of the IPC.
6. Having considered the materials on record and heard
the submissions across the Bar, I am of the view that there is no
reason to interfere with the finding regarding guilt of the petitioner,
in the exercise of powers of revision under Section 401 of the Code.
Hence conviction of the petitioner for the offence under Section 323
2024:KER:86764
of the IPC is confirmed.
7. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo simple
imprisonment for a period of one month and to pay a fine of
Rs.1000/-. Considering the period elapsed after the occurrence,
relationship between the parties and age of the petitioner, it is
apposite to order payment of the compensation instead of sending
the petitioner for a short duration to jail.
In the circumstances, the sentence is modified. The petitioner
is sentenced to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court
and directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten
thousand only) to PW1-the injured. In default of payment of
compensation, the petitioner shall undergo simple imprisonment
for a period of one month. The petitioner shall appear before the
trial court on 19.12.2024 to suffer the sentence and pay
compensation.
Accordingly, the revision petition is allowed in part.
Sd/-
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE
PV
