PRADEEPAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioners herein are the three accused in C.C.No.222/2005 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Nadapuram. They faced prosecution under Sections 323 and 324 R/w 34 of IPC, on the allegation that at about 8 pm on 27.1.2005 they assaulted the defecto complainant, Nanu, due to some enmity and inflicted injuries on his body, including loosening of teeth, with weapons like iron rod, stick etc. The crime was registered on the first information statement given by the defacto complainant Nanu, and after the investigation, the police submitted final report in the trial court. All the three accused pleaded not guilty to the charge framed by the trial court under Sections 323 and 324 IPC. The prosecution examined six witnesses including the defacto complainant, and marked Exts.P1 to P4. Relying on the evidence given by PWs1 and 2, and the medical evidence given by PW3, the trial court found the three accused guilty. On conviction they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each under Sections 323 and 324 IPC. They were also directed to pay a compensation of 1,500/ - to the injured under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C.

(2.) AGGRIEVED by the conviction and sentence, the the three accused approached the Court of Session, Kozhikode with Crl.A No.812/2008. In appeal the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vadakara confirmed the conviction, but modified the sentence. Accordingly the sentence under Section 323 IPC was reduced to rigorous imprisonment for three months, but the sentence under Section 324 IPC was maintained, however with modification that instead of a direction to pay compensation, a fine sentence of 1,500/ - was imposed. Now they are before this Court in revision, challenging the legality and propriety of the conviction and sentence.

(3.) THE doctor has given evidence regarding the injuries sustained by PW1, that he had contusion on the left shoulder, back, and right cheek, loosening of four teeth, and also tenderness over the jaw. PW2 well supported the prosecution during investigation. But in court he made an attempt to help the accused. However, he was contradicted with the previous statement given during investigation. His evidence in court is that on his way he heard some cry, and when he came near he saw PW1 lying with bleeding injuries. He saw the third accused standing nearby with a stick, and the two others running away from the scene. This is the evidence given by PW2. Though he does not fully incriminate the accused Nos.1 and 2 or the 3rd accused, his evidence gives a strong circumstance indicating the role of the three accused in the incident of assault.