PARAMESWARAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision brought by the four accused in C.C. No.807/1999 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Adoor. Pending the revision, the 4th revision petitioner died, and the fact of his death was recorded in the proceedings. The four accused faced prosecution in the court below on the allegation that at about 9.30 p.m. on 20.8.1999, on the public road in front of the Chithra Hospital, Kurampala, near Panthalam, they assaulted the de facto complainant Arjunan, and inflicted simple and grievous injuries on his body with a weapon, due to previous enemity. The police registered the crime on the F.I.Statement given by the de facto complainant Arjunan, and after investigation, submitted final report in court under Sections 323 and 326 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. The four accused appeared before the learned Magistrate, and pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against them.

(2.) The prosecution examined six witnesses, and proved Exts.P1 to P7 documents in the trial court. The accused denied the incriminating circumstances when examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., 1973 and projected a defence that the de facto complainant probably sustained injuries in a motor accident, when hit down by a scooter. They examined two witnesses in defence.

(3.) On an appreciation of the evidence, the trial court found all the four accused guilty under Sections 323 and 324 IPC. They were convicted with the aid of Section 34 IPC under the two Sections. On conviction, they were sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two weeks each and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each under Section 323 IPC, and to undergo simple imprisonment for one year each, and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/- each under Section 326 IPC. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 23.6.2005, the accused approached the Court of Session, Pathanamthitta with Crl.A. No.220/2005. In appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc)-II, Pathanamthitta confirmed the conviction and sentence, and accordingly, dismissed the appeal. Now the accused are before this Court in revision, challenging the legality and propriety of the conviction and sentence.