MANI Vs. THE STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revision petitioners are the accused in C.C. No. 436 of 1998 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Sulthan Bathery. They were tried by the learned Magistrate for offences punishable under Sections 427 and 447 of the Indian Penal Code. The court below convicted them and imposed a fine of Rs. 500/- under each count on each of the accused with default sentences. Revision petitioners filed an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Wayanad, Kalpetta as Crl. Appeal No. 45 of 2000. After considering the evidence in detail, the learned Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction and the sentence. Feeling aggrieved, the accused have come up in revision.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(3.) It is trite that what is to be considered in a revision is the legality, propriety and correctness of the sentence or order passed by the courts below. However, the learned counsel for the revision petitioners took me through the evidence, considered by the courts below to arrive at the finding of guilt of the revision petitioners. Courts below considered the testimony of PW1, the complainant. According to him, he owns about 25 cents of land at Muthanga and the revision petitioners/accused persons on some day in July, 1995 trespassed into the property and constructed a road through the said property. It is the allegation of PW1 that on account of the illegal act of the accused persons, he suffered a loss to a tune of Rs. 25,000/-. He filed Ext. P1 complaint before the Police. This witness deposed in court in terms with the averments in the complaint. In spite of cross-examination, his evidence could not be shattered.