KITTUNNI SUBRAMONIAM Vs. KUNHUMON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pw. 2 in C.C. 1072 of 1972 on the file of the Second Class Magistrate, Trichur, is the Revision Petitioner. He and Pws. 1 and 3 are watchmen and Pw. 4 is the Superintendent in the Mepadom Rubber Estate. The accused, two in number, who were charged under S.447, 341, 324 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code were acquitted and it is that acquittal that is sought to be revised here.

(2.) The occurrence took place at or about 12.30 in the noon on August 8, 1971. The accused trespassed into the Estate and cut grass. When Pw. 2 asked them to go away the second accused wrongfully restrained him and the first accused cut him with a sickle. The plea of the accused was one of denial.

(3.) The Magistrate has in his judgment discussed the evidence adduced in the case only in so far as it relates to the offences under S.341 and 324 and not to the offence under S.447 of the IPC. The evidence of the occurrence witnesses, Pws. 1 to 3, shows that the accused cut grass in the estate and that even after Pw. 2 asked them to go away they continued to remain in the estate. The evidence of Pw. 4 shows that the entry of the accused in the Estate was unauthorised. There is absolutely no discussion in the judgment about the nature of the entry. Therefore this case has to be sent back to the Magistrate for a proper consideration of the evidence in the case.