KRISHNAN KUTTY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Courts below concurrently found petitioner guilty of the offence u/s.332, IPC, on a charge that at or about 9 p.m. on 22-7-85 he voluntarily caused hurt to deter a public servant (PW 1) from discharging his duty.

(2.) PW 1 a police constable had gone to a village, in the hill district of Wynad to serve summons. He has returning to his headquarters by about 7 p.m., when he saw petitioner behaving in an unruly manner under the influence of alcohol in a public place. PW 1 advised petitioner to go home without creating difficulties. Petitioner persisted in his behaviour, and then PW 1 took him into custody and boarded a bus with him. While in the bus, petitioner hit PW 1 on his nose, causing bleeding injuries. PW 1 fell down and then, petitioner kicked him. PW 1 was then in uniform. That is the evidence of PW 1, and PW 5 conductor of the bus. PW 2 a hostile witness also says that PW 1 was in uniform, and that he saw PW 1 with bleeding injuries. PW 8 doctor examined PW 1 and issued Ext. P2 wound certificate, noticing injuries corresponding to those stated by PWs 1 and 5. Medical evidence thus corroborates the evidence of PWs 1 and 5.

(3.) Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that PW 1 was not discharging official duties and that petitioner would not have committed the offence, if he had known that PW 1 was a member of a uniformed force. Evidence of PWs 1, 2 and 5 is to the effect that PW 1 was in uniform. He was discharging official duties in preventing petitioner from misbehaving in a public place, and in taking him into custody. Contention is without merit. It was further submitted that petitioner was not allowed an opportunity to cross-examine PW 1 effectively. PW 1 was examined on 29-9-86. After prosecution evidence was closed, on 29-7-87, a petition was made to recall PW 1. Though belated, the learned Magistrate allowed the petition and granted three more opportunities. These were not availed of, by petitioner. The contention must therefore fail.