THAMI ALIAS KUNHUTTY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was concurrently held guilty of the offences punishable under Secs.323 and 354 IPC. He was sentenced by the learned Magistrate to undergo R.I. for 3 months for the offence under Sec.323 IPC and to R.I. for 6 months for the offence under Sec.354 IPC. The appellate court confirmed the conviction but modified the sentence to S.I. for two months each and also to pay Rs.3,000.00 as compensation to PW1. (The learned Magistrate has convicted the petitioner only for the offences under Secs.323 and 354 IPC and not under Sec.324 IPC. There is a mistake in the judgment of the appellate court. Similarly, PW1 is the victim/de facto complainant. In the last portion of the sentence passed by the appellate court, the compensation was directed to be paid to PW2. It should have been 'PW1'. There also such a clerical mistake is seen).

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the revision petitioner submits that the courts below went wrong in placing reliance on the evidence given by PW1. (It is observed by the learned Sessions Judge that there is a mistake in showing the rank of the witnesses also. To avoid further confusion, the victim in this case is hereinafter referred to as PW1. She was shown as PW1 in the appendix of the judgment of the trial court also).

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that the incident took place about 20 years back and so, the sentence may be modified.