[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Thirikkott Sasi vs Edamana Haridasan on 6 February, 2026
2026:KER:10757
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH
FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 17TH MAGHA, 1947
CRL.REV.PET NO.797 OF 2006
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 05.09.2005 IN Crl.A NO.91
OF 2003 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT II, KOZHIKODE
ARISING OUT OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.01.2003 IN
C.C.NO.267 OF 1998 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST
CLASS - V, KOZHIKODE
REVISION PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS/ACCUSED:
1 THIRIKKOTT SASI
S/O.MADHAVAN, THIRIKKOT VEEDU,
P.O.PANTHEERANKAVU, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
2 ELEDATH NAINESH
AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.RAVEENDRAN ELEDATH HOUSE,
P.O.PANTHEERANKAVU, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
BY ADV.
SHRI.SUNNY MATHEW
RESPONDENTS:
1 EDAMANA HARIDASAN
EDAMANA HOUSE, P.O.PANTHEERANKAVU,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
2 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADVS.
SMT.C.G.PREETHA
SRI.M.PRAVEESH
SRI.C.S.SUNIL
SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI
2026:KER:10757
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.797 of 2006
-2-
SRI.RENJIT GEORGE, SR.PP
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY
HEARD ON 06.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:10757
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.797 of 2006
-3-
G. GIRISH, J.
-------------------------------
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.797 of 2006
------------------------------------
Dated this the 6th day of February, 2026
ORDER
The concurrent verdicts of conviction and sentence of the
petitioners for the commission of offences under Sections 323 and
324 IPC by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court - V, Kozhikode,
and the Additional Sessions Court - II, Kozhikode, are under
challenge in this revision.
2. The prosecution case is that on 01.03.1998, at about
10.00 pm, the petitioners inflicted voluntary hurt upon PW1 by
beating with a reaper, and also by beating and kicking him inside a
temporary tea shop erected in connection with the festival of a
temple, in which PW1 was officiating as the office bearer of the
committee. The learned Magistrate had initiated the proceedings
against the petitioners upon a private complaint filed by the defacto
complainant / PW1.
2026:KER:10757
3. After an evaluation of the evidence adduced by the
complainant through the examination of PWs 1 to 4, and the
documents marked as Ext.P1, and also after considering the defence
evidence adduced through the oral testimony of DW1, the learned
Magistrate found the petitioners guilty of the commission of the
offences under Sections 323 and 324 IPC and convicted them
thereunder. The 1st petitioner was sentenced to undergo Simple
Imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 324 IPC and
the 2nd petitioner was sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment
for six months under Section 323 IPC. Though the petitioners
challenged the aforesaid verdict in appeal, the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, who considered the appeal, declined to interfere
with the findings of the learned Magistrate. Accordingly, the appeal
was dismissed, confirming the conviction and sentence awarded by
the Trial Court. Aggrieved by the above concurrent verdicts of the
courts below, the petitioner is here before this Court with this
revision.
2026:KER:10757
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the
learned Public Prosecutor representing the 2nd respondent. The 1st
respondent, though engaged a counsel to appear for him, did not
choose to advance any arguments.
5. The Trial Court has relied on the evidence of PWs 1 to 3
to arrive at the finding that the petitioners mounted physical assault
upon PW1 at about 10.00 pm on 01.03.1998 inside a temporary tea
shop while the festival was going on at Karumakan Temple. The 1st
accused is alleged to have caught hold of PW1 from behind and
inflicted blows upon him with a reaper. The 2nd accused, along with
the 1st accused, is alleged to have further physically assaulted the
defacto complainant with hands and hitting him. PW4, the Doctor
who treated PW1 on 02.03.1998, testified before the Trial Court
about the injuries suffered by PW1 and the treatment administered
to him. There is absolutely no reason to interfere with the findings of
the courts below, about the act of the petitioners inflicting voluntary
hurt upon PW1 on the night of 01.03.1998. However, it is to be
noted that there is paucity of evidence as to whether the reaper
2026:KER:10757
allegedly used by the 1st petitioner to hit PW1 could be termed as a
dangerous weapon, or an object which, if used as a weapon of
offence, is likely to cause death. It is pertinent to note that since the
case has been instituted on a complaint, there was no occasion for
the recovery of the weapon of offence. Even in the absence of any
evidence as to the nature of the weapon used by the petitioners to
physically assault PW1, the courts below came to the erroneous
finding that the 1st petitioner committed the offence under Section
324 IPC. Since the findings in the above regard is patently illegal and
irregular, the conviction awarded by the courts below for the
commission of the offence under Section 324 IPC, is liable to be
interfered with in this revision. As the evidence on record clearly
brought out the act of the petitioners inflicting voluntary hurt upon
PW1, both the petitioners are liable to be convicted for the offence
under Section 323 IPC instead of 324 IPC. So also, having regard to
the nature and the gravity of the offence alleged against the
petitioners, and the other facts and circumstances of the case
including the elapse of about 28 years from the date of commission
2026:KER:10757
of the crime, I am of the view that the sentence of imprisonment
awarded by the courts below upon the petitioners are liable to be
excluded. However, the petitioners will have to pay a modest amount
as compensation to PW1 for the injuries suffered by him at their
hands.
In the result, the revision stands allowed in part as follows :-
(i) The conviction of the 1st petitioner for the
commission of the offence under Section 324 IPC, is
hereby set aside.
(ii) In partial modification of the conviction
awarded by the courts below, petitioners 1 and 2 are
convicted for the commission of the offence under Section
323 IPC.
(iii) In supersession of the sentence awarded by
the courts below, the petitioners are sentenced under
Section 323 IPC to imprisonment till the rising of court,
with a further direction to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five
2026:KER:10757
thousand only) each to PW1 as compensation under
Section 357(3) Cr.P.C.
(iv) In default of payment of compensation as
directed above, the petitioners will undergo Simple
Imprisonment for a term of one month.
(v) The petitioners shall surrender before the Trial
Court within a period of 30 days from today to undergo the
modified sentence awarded by this order, and also to make
payment of the compensation as directed in this order.
The Registry shall transmit the case records, along with a copy
of this order, to the Trial Court for enforcement of the sentence
awarded by this order.
Sd/-
G. GIRISH
JUDGE
ded/06.02.2026
