BABU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) When the case was taken up for hearing, counsel appointed on State Brief was absent. So the Crl.Revision Petition was disposed of after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and perusing the records.

(2.) The first accused in C.C.No.343 of 1995 on the file of the Judicial I Class Magistrate Court, Sasthamcotta is the revision petitioner. He was found guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 457 and 380 I.P.C., convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two years under Section 457 and simple imprisonment for two years under Section 380 I.P.C. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. Petitioner along with the other accused filed Crl.Appeal No.153 of 1997 before the Sessions Court, Kollam. The learned Sessions Judge set aside the conviction and sentence imposed on accused Nos. 2 to 5 but confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed on the first accused. Challenging that conviction and sentence, this Criminal Revision Petition is filed through the Superintendent of Central Prison, Viyyur.

(3.) The prosecution case in brief is as follows: Petitioner along with the other accused criminally trespassed into the house of P.W.1 and committed theft of a gold chain worn by the grandson of P.W.1 The accused were subsequently arrested in connection with another case. During interrogation, the accused confessed of having committed the offences involved in this case also. They were produced before the Magistrate. Copies of the relevant documents were furnished to the accused. Charges under Sections 457 and 380 I.P.C. were framed, read over and explained to the accused. They understood the same and pleaded not guilty.