[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Ajith Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 2026
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH
TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 30TH POUSHA, 1947
CRL.REV.PET NO. 905 OF 2006
JUDGMENT DATED 18.01.2006 IN Crl.A NO.235 OF 2002 OF
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (FAST TRACK COURT-III),
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
CC NO.349 OF 1999 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST
CLASS -V, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM(SPECIAL COURT-MARKLIST CASES)
REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT:
KRISHNA KUMAR
S/O RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, TC 5/2282, PANDARAVILA VEEDU,
KADAPPATHALA,KOWDIAR WARD, PEROORKADA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.
SRI.M.SREEKUMAR
SRI.THOUFEEK AHAMED
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
SRI RENJIT GEORGE, SR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 20.01.2026, ALONG WITH Crl.Rev.Pet.1222/2006,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:5072
Crl.R.P Nos.905
& 1222 of 2006
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH
TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 30TH POUSHA, 1947
CRL.REV.PET NO. 1222 OF 2006
JUDGMENT DATED 18.01.2006 IN Crl.A NO.226 OF 2002 OF
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (FAST TRACK COURT-III),
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
JUDGMENT DATED IN 09.07.2002 IN CC NO.349 OF 1999 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-V,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM(SPECIAL COURT-MARKLIST CASES)
REVISION PETITIONER/2ND APPELLANT/3RD ACCUSED:
AJITH KUMAR
S/O APPU PILLAI, SUKUMARI BHAVAN, SWATHY NAGAR,
KANJIRAMPARA WARD, PEROORKADA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV SRI.M.SREEKUMAR
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
SRI SUDHEER G., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 20.01.2026, ALONG WITH Crl.Rev.Pet.905/2006,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:5072
Crl.R.P Nos.905
& 1222 of 2006
3
ORDER
The revision petitioners are the accused Nos.3 and 7 in CC
No.349/1999 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court V,
Thiruvananthapuram. They faced trial for the commission of offences
under Sections 143, 147, 148 and 324 IPC read with Section 149 IPC.
2. The learned Magistrate by the judgment rendered on
09.07.2002, convicted the petitioners, along with 4 other accused, for the
commission of the aforesaid offences. They were sentenced to undergo
Simple Imprisonment for 6 months each and to pay compensation of
Rs.250/- each to PW1 to PW3 and CW2. The aforesaid verdict of the
learned Magistrate was challenged in Crl.Appeal No.226/2002 by the 3rd
accused and the 1st accused, and in Crl.Appeal No.235/2002 by the 7th
accused before the Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The learned
Additional Sessions Judge, who considered the above appeals, concurred
with the learned Magistrate as far as the conviction is concerned. However,
the learned Additional Sessions Judge modified the sentence awarded by
the Trial Court. Accordingly, the accused Nos.1 to 3 and 5 to 7 were
sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for two months each for the
2026:KER:5072
Crl.R.P Nos.905
& 1222 of 2006
offence under Section 143, Simple Imprisonment for a period of three
months each for the offence under Section 147, Simple Imprisonment for a
period of 3 months each for the offence under Section 148 and Simple
Imprisonment for six months each for the offence under Section 324 IPC,
and the sentences were directed to run concurrently. It is aggrieved by
the above concurrent findings of conviction, and modified sentence
awarded by the Appellate Court, that the accused Nos.3 and 7 have filed
these revision petitions.
3. The prosecution case is that on 22.04.1999 at about 11.15 pm,
the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly armed with
dangerous weapons like motor cycle chain, stones, etc., and committed
rioting by physically assaulting PW1, who happened to be there at the place
of occurrence. The accused are also alleged to have mounted physical
assault upon PW2 and PW3, who came to the spot, and caused injuries to
all the above witnesses.
4. In the trial before the learned Magistrate, the prosecution
examined 6 witnesses as PW1 to PW6 and brought on record 5 documents
as Exts.P1 to P5. It is by relying on the aforesaid evidence that the learned
Magistrate convicted the accused Nos.1 to 3 and accused Nos.5 to 7 and
2026:KER:5072
Crl.R.P Nos.905
& 1222 of 2006
awarded the sentence as stated above. In the appeal, the learned
Additional Sessions Judge made a reappraisal of the entire evidence and
held that there is no reason to interfere with the finding of conviction.
However, the sentence was modified as stated in paragraph No.2 above. In
the present petitions, the petitioners would contend that the courts below
went wrong in arriving at the finding that the petitioners committed the
offences alleged against them.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned
Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.
6. The Trial Court relied on the evidence tendered by PW1 to PW3
towards arriving at the finding that the petitioners herein, along with the
other 4 accused, committed the offence alleged against them. The
Appellate Court also found that there are no serious infirmities in the
aforesaid evidence to reject the testimonies of the aforesaid witnesses.
However, it is pertinent to note that as regards the offence under Section
324 IPC, evidence is lacking on the point as to whether the weapons
alleged to have been used could be termed as dangerous weapons or
objects which are capable of causing death. There is no recovery of the
weapons allegedly used by petitioners. Nor had the prosecution got any
2026:KER:5072
Crl.R.P Nos.905
& 1222 of 2006
explanation for the failure to recover the weapons. In the absence of the
evidence in the above regard, the conviction and sentence awarded for the
commission of offences under Sections 148 and 324 IPC cannot be said to
be legal. Therefore, the alleged act of the petitioners inflicting voluntary
hurt upon PW1 to PW3 has to be termed as an offence under Section 323
IPC. So also, it is necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case,
that the sentence of imprisonment awarded by the Appellate Court has to
be reduced to imprisonment till the rising of the court, if the petitioners are
ready to make payment of a modest amount as compensation to PW1, who
sustained notable injuries in this case. Subject to the above modification,
these petitions are disposed of as follows:
1) The concurrent findings of the courts below, convicting the
petitioners for the commission of offences under Sections 143 and 147 IPC,
are confirmed.
2) The conviction awarded by the courts below for the
commission of offence under Section 148 IPC is set aside.
3) The conviction awarded by the courts below for the offence
under Section 324 IPC is modified to one under Section 323 IPC.
4) In supersession of the sentence awarded by the Appellate
2026:KER:5072
Crl.R.P Nos.905
& 1222 of 2006
Court, the petitioners are sentenced to imprisonment till the rising of the
court under Section 323 IPC, with a further direction to pay compensation
of Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) each under Section 357(3)
Cr.P.C, to PW1. No separate sentence is awarded for the commission of
offences under Sections 143 and 147 IPC.
5) In default of payment of compensation as directed above, the
petitioners will undergo Simple Imprisonment for a term of 3 months.
6) 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.
Registry shall transmit the case records forthwith to the Trial Court,
along with a copy of this order.
Sd/-
G.GIRISH
JUDGE
IAP
