VELAYUDHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this revision, I have no other alternative than to quash the appellate judgment since the criminal appeal has been disposed of by the learned Sessions Judge in a supercilious manner. That apart, learned sessions judge has not passed the judgment in accordance with law.

(2.) PETITIONER herein was accused in a case before a judicial magistrate of first class for offences under Ss. 447 and 324 of the indian Penal Code. Trial magistrate convicted him of the offences and sentenced him to imprisonment and fine. PETITIONER filed an appeal before Sessions Court, but learned Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction and sentence. This revision is in challenge of the said judgment.

(3.) BUT in appeal, learned Sessions Judge did not consider the defence plea based on S. 84 of the IPC. He did not even refer to such a plea. On reading the judgment of the Sessions Court, I felt that learned sessions Judge might not have conic to know that accused had examined two witnesses on the defence, side.