IBRAHIM KUTTY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioners accused of offences under Sections 143, 147, 447 and 427 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code challenge in this revision their conviction confirmed by the appellate court.

(2.) P.W. 1 and his brother own 45 cents of land. On the southern side, there was a boundary wall touching a pathway. There was an attempt to widen this pathway. This prosecution case is that the accused and others formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, removed the boundary wall by force, widened the road and thus committed the offences under the Penal Code. The incident took place in 1979 almost at the dead of night. The two courts have gone in detail in their appreciation of evidence and found that the accused are guilty. In spite of the persuasive argument of the young counsel, I am not inclined to exercise this revisional jurisdiction for a reappraisal of the evidence. P.Ws. 1,3,4,6 and 7 have deposed that all the accused were engaged in the demolition of the wall and that accused Nos. 1 and 8 were giving the necessary directions. This evidence has been rightly accepted. The conviction was proper; the relief under Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure justified.

(3.) However, his contention on a question of law requires consideration. He submits that force or violence is an ingredient of the offence of rioting under Section 146 Indian Penal Code and Section 349 of the Code which defines force has to apply and there can be no offence of rioting when any unlawful assembly merely used force to demolish buildings, or walls and is directed against inanimate objects.