LAWS(KER)-2018-3-23

PADMANABHAN, S/O. BALAKRISHNAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Decided On March 19, 2018
Padmanabhan, S/O. Balakrishnan Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner herein is the sole accused in C.C 520/2001 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Malappuram. The de-facto complainant in this case is his next door neighbour. She is a lady having husband and children. The revision petitioner faced prosecution in the court below under Sections 452 , 355 and 324 I.P.C, on the allegation that at about 3.30 p.m on 11.3.2001, he trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant, assaulted her, and inflicted injuries on her body with a chappal and also with a stick, due to some previous enmity. The Police registered the crime on the complaint made by the de-facto complainant on the same day. After investigation, the Police submitted final report in court.

(2.) The accused appeared before the learned Magistrate and pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against him. The prosecution examined ten witnesses and proved Exts.P1 to P4 documents. The MO1 and MO2 properties were also identified during trial. The accused denied the incriminating circumstances when examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C and projected a defence that the de facto complainant foisted a false case against him for fear that he would report her bad ways to her husband, who was abroad at that time.The accused also examined a witness on his side in defence as DW1.

(3.) On an appreciation of the evidence, the trial court found the accused guilty. On conviction, he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two years under Section 452 I.P.C and to undergo simple imprisonment for one year each under Sections 355 and 324 I.P.C. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 12.10.2004, the accused approached the Court of Session, Manjeri with Crl.A.563/2004. In appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc-I), Manjeri confirmed the conviction and sentence, and accordingly dismissed the appeal. The accused has come up in revision before this court, challenging the legality and propriety of the conviction and sentence.