KOCHU KUNJU KUNJU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused 1 and 2 in C. C. 252 of 1959 on the file of the Munsiff-Magistrate, Paravur are the revision petitioners. There were in all six accused. They were convicted under S.147, 224, 225 and 353 IPC. In appeal accused 3 to 6 were acquitted. The 1st accused was convicted under S.224 IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 3 months and the 2nd accused was convicted under S.225 IPC. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 4 months.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioners has assailed the conviction on the ground that the arrest of the 1st accused was not lawful and as such no offence is committed by either of the accused. S.224 and 225 of the Indian Penal Code deal with the resistance or escape from lawful apprehension. It is essential for the conviction under these sections that the prosecution should show that the apprehension or arrest made or attempted to be made was lawful in every way. The learned Public Prosecutor has not contested this position. So the question for decision would be whether the warrant on the basis of which the arrest was made is a legal warrant. The main contention is that the endorsement on the warrant by the Sub-Inspector of Police to the Police Constable Pw. 1 who effected the arrest was not in proper form as required under

(3.) S.79 says that: