The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of the appellant's involvement in an unlawful assembly with the common object of inflicting grievous hurt, leading to the alteration of the appellant's conviction and sentencing.

1. The appellant, who was the first accused at the trial before the Sessions Court of Kottayam, and nineteen others were tried for offences alleged to have been committed by them as members of an unlawful assembly. The appellant alone was convicted, the convictions being for offence under S.326 read with S.149 I.P.C., and under S.148 I.P.C.; he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years for the former, and for one year for the latter conviction.

2. The charge was laid by the Police after investigation against twenty persons of whom one died before the trial commenced in the Sessions Court. It would appear that on the 3rd June, 1958, Pw. 6 had filed a petition, Ext. P. 5, at the Vaikom Police Station, complaining of thefts of agricultural produce in his property by certain tenants. Pw. 2, a Police constable on duty at the Vaikom Police Station, proceeded to the spot on the 4th June, 1958, for investigating into the petition on complaint and was accompanied by Pw. 1, another Police Constable, attached to the same Police Station. They learnt, that Pw. 6 had gone to Alwaye and therefore they came to Thevalakkattu Purayidom, in which Pw. 3, the son of Pw. 6, was attending to the plucking of cocoanuts from the trees. Pws.1 to 3 had their meal in Thevalakkattu Purayidom and when Pw.1 was about to have a chew, a few men stated to be accused 1 to 7 and deceased Krishnan came there and belaboured Pw. 1. They were soon joined by others. Some of them attacked Pw. 2 as well. Pws. 2 and 3 then ran away from the place to the opposite bank of a thodu or canal on the northern side; but Pw.1 was bound hand and foot, and lay there injured. The accused soon left the place. Pw. 2 hurried to the Police Station and gave the first information, Ext. P2, upon which Pw. 13, the Sub-Inspector of Police, registered a case and proceeded to the scene of occurrence and investigated the case. This is the substance of the case against the accused.

3. Pw.1 was examined by Pw. 8, the Civil Surgeon-in-charge of the Vaikom Hospital, and he observed eight injuries, being contusions on the cheeks, on the neck, on the eye-lids, on the back and on the right thigh, & abrasions on different parts of the body. Some of these injuries could be caused by hitting with a hard substance like M. 0.1, cocoanut, and the abrasions on the hands and legs could be caused by tying with a rope. Pw. 2, who was also examined by Pw. 8, had an abrasion on the left scapula and a contusion on the left elbow, which could be caused by hitting with a stone like M. 0.4. There is no reason to disbelieve the medical evidence in support of the above.

4. Of the eye-witnesses to the occurrence, Pws. 4 and 5 were not acted upon by the learned judge, who tried the case. Likewise, the testimony of Pw. 2 also could not be acted upon as to the identity of the assailants, because that was the first occasion on which he was visiting the locality. He had not seen any of them before, and he admitted, that he mentioned the names of accused 1 to 6 in Ext. P. 2 after having ascertained their names through some one else; but the first accused, the appellant, was well-known to both Pws.1 and 3 and with regard to his identity the learned judge had no difficulty in accepting their evidence. At the same time, though Pw.1 had testified to some of the individual acts committed by the first accused and others, Pw. 3 did not specify such acts, although the trend of his evidence was, that the first accused was one, in the group of men who came to Thevalakkattu Purayidom and attacked Pw. 1. The learned judge therefore acted upon the testimony of Pw. 1, only to the extent it received corroboration from that of Pw. 3, and came to the conclusion that the first accused and a large number of persons, more than five in all, attacked and belaboured Pw. 1, inflicting the injuries on him, as members of an unlawful assembly, who had a common object to inflict grievous hurt to Pw. 1. The convictions of the