FRANCIS DASAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioners herein are the accused Nos.1 and 2 in C.C.No.708/1994 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Attingal. They and two others faced prosecution before the court below under Sections 341, 324 and 326 IPC read with Section 34 IPC on the allegation that at about 6 p.m. on 22.2.1994 at Chirayinkeezhu near the Arayathuruthy bridge, they assaulted one Raj and his brother Dassan due to previous enemity in connection with a then subsisting matrimonial dispute between the accused and the sister of said Raj, and inflicted simple and grievous injuries on their body with weapons like chopper, stick, etc. The police registered the crime on the basis of the F.I.Statement given by the said Raj. Initially, the crime was registered only under Sections 341 and 324 IPC. The accused were arrested and they were released on bail soon. In spite of efforts, the weapons of offence could not be seized or recovered by the police. A search was conducted at the house of the accused, but nothing could be recovered. Any way, after investigation, the police submitted final report against four accused. The accused Nos.1 and 2 are brothers, the 3rd accused is their brother-in-law, and the 4th accused is the father of the accused Nos.1 and 2. The wife of the 1st accused is the sister of the de facto complainant Raj and his brother Dassan. It was their strained matrimony that actually led to the alleged incident.

(2.) The four accused appeared before the learned Magistrate, and pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against them under Sections 341, 324 and 326 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. The prosecution examined ten witnesses and proved Exts.P1 to P8 documents in the trial court. When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused denied the incriminating circumstances. The accused did not adduce any oral evidence in defence, but Ext.D1 was marked on their side.

(3.) On an appreciation of the evidence, the trial court found all the accused guilty. On conviction, they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years each under Section 326 IPC read with Section 34 IPC, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years each under Section 324 IPC read with Section 34 IPC, and to undergo simple imprisonment for one month each under Section 341 IPC read with Section 34 IPC, by judgment dated 4.2.1998. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction, the accused approached the Court of Session, Thiruvananthapuram with Crl.A.No.81/1998. In appeal, the learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Thiruvananthapuram found the accused Nos.3 and 4 not guilty of any offence, and accordingly, they were acquitted. The 2nd accused was found not guilty under Section 326 IPC, and so, the conviction and sentence againt him under Section 326 IPC was also set aside. But, the conviction and sentence against him under Sections 324 and 341 IPC was confirmed. As regards the 1st accused, the conviction and sentence under all the three sections was confirmed by the appellate court, by judgment dated 26.9.2005. Now the accused Nos.1 and 2 are before this Court in revision, challenging the legality and propriety of the conviction and sentence.