IMPORTANT POINT
The court confirmed conviction under Section 326 IPC for grievous hurt, setting aside conviction under Section 324 IPC as it constitutes a lesser included offence.

ORDER :

Revision petitioner is the accused in S.C.No.615/2015 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, North Paravur and he is the appellant in Crl.A No.291/2016 on the file of Additional Sessions Court II, North Paravur. In this revision, he assails the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed against him for the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 326 of IPC .

2. The prosecution case is that on 12.4.2012 at around 8 pm., at UC College-Thadikadavu Road, Aluva West village in front of the shop of accused, accused attacked PW1 with an iron rod and inflicted injuries on his head and caused fracture of his right wrist. Accused also criminally intimidated PW1. The motive for the attack, according to the prosecution was the enmity of the accused towards PW1 for questioning him about the removal of a board fitted by PW1 to the flagpole in front of the shop of the accused.

3. After investigation, the investigating officer laid final report against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 326, 506(ii) and 308 IPC .

4. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge who tried the case found the accused guilty of the offences under Sections 324 and 326 IPC and he was convicted and sentenced thereunder. Accused was found not guilty of the offences under Sections 506(ii) and 308 IPC and he was acquitted of the said offence.

5. In appeal preferred as Crl.A No.291/2016, the learned Sessions Judge, North Paravur confirmed the conviction under Sections 324 and 326 IPC . But the sentence imposed against the accused was modified in appeal and he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence under Section 324 IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 16 months and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- for the offence under Section 326 IPC . In default of payment of fine he was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. It was further ordered that if the fine amount is realised, it shall be paid to PW1 as compensation under Section 357 (1)(b) Cr.P.C .

6. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence accused has preferred this revision contending that the trial court and the appellate court have not analysed the evidence in its correct perspective; that the evidence of PW1 cannot be relied on as it is full of contradictions and embellishments; that the evidence of PWs 2 and 3 who alleged to have witnessed the incident is not reliable and there are material discrepancies in the evidence of PWs 1 to 3. Further, it was contended that since MO1 weapon was not sent for chemical analysis, the use of weapon for the commission of the offence could not be established by the prosecution. Further it was contended that if at all the revision petitioner had inflicted any injury to PW1, it was in exercise of the right of private defence of the body.

7. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the evidence adduced by the prosecution would show that accused attacked PW1 with MO1 iron rod and caused grievous injuries and therefore there is no reason to interfere with the finding of conviction and order of sentence.

8. Let us see whether the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence against the accused needs any interference by this Court.

9. PW1 is the injured and he is the defacto complainant. He testified that on 12.4.2012 at around 7.30 pm he along with Sasi, Sulaiman, Nazar, Abdul Rehman fitted a board of ‘Building and Road Workers Federation’ in the flagpole near the shop of the accused at Millupadi Junction, Veliyathunadu East. Thereafter, Sasi, Sulaiman and Nasar had gone for sticking posters. PW1 went to his home and came back again to the spot. Sasi and Sulaiman were also there at that time. Then they could see that the board which they fitted was missing. Accused was standing near the flagpole. PW1 enquired the accused about the missing of the board. Then the accused, who was holding MO1 iron rod beat on the head of PW1 with the said iron rod