COMMON ORDER

The petitioner in Criminal Revision Petition No.1186/2012 was tried as accused No.1 by the Court of learned II Addl.Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.,) & J.M.F.C., Udupi, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the `trial Court') in C.C.No.4846/2003, for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 326, 109 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the `IPC') and was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 326 of IPC by the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 18.06.2007 and was sentenced accordingly.

2. The summary of the case of the prosecution in the trial Court was that, on the date 24.05.1998, at about 8.50 p.m., near service Bus Stand in Udupi Town, within the limits of complainant-Police Station, the accused No.1, who is the petitioner in Criminal Revision Petition No.1186/2012 and respondent in Criminal Revision Petition No.306/2013, joined by other accused, in furtherance of their common intention, armed with deadly weapons, wrongfully restrained CW-1 Anil Shenoy and CW-2 Varadaraj Shenoy and assaulted them. Due to such an assault, CW-1 Anil Shenoy sustained grievous injuries. He was shifted to K.M.C. Hospital, Manipal by the people gathered there. An intimation to the police was forwarded as per Ex.P-6 by the Medical Officer on 25.05.1998. The police after recording the statement of complainant on 25.05.1998, registered a crime in their Station Crime No.92/1998 against six accused, including the present accused No.1, who is the petitioner in Criminal Revision Petition No.1186/2012, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 324, 326, 109 read with Section 149 of IPC. However, after investigation, the charge sheet was filed against three accused, including accused No.1, for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 324, 326, 109 read with Section 34 of IPC.

3. The accused appeared in the trial Court and contested the matter through his counsel. The accused pleaded not guilty. As such, in order to prove the guilt against the accused, the prosecution got examined eleven witnesses from PW-1 to PW-11, got marked documents from Exs.P-1 to P-10 and produced four material objects from MO-1 to MO-4. However, neither any witness was examined nor any documents were got marked on behalf of the accused.

After trial, the trial Court by its judgment of conviction and order sentence dated 18.06.2007, acquitted accused Nos.2 and 3 of the offences alleged against them, however, it convicted accused No.1 for the offences punishable under Sections 341 and 326 of IPC and ordered him to undergo imprisonment for a period of one month and also to pay a fine of `500/- and in default of payment of fine amount, to undergo imprisonment for a further period of fifteen days for the offence punishable under Section 341 of IPC. It further sentenced accused No.1 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of `5,000/- and in default of payment of fine amount, to undergo imprisonment for further period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC.

4. Aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and order on sentence, accused No.1 preferred an appeal in Criminal Appeal No.81/2007, in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Udupi (hereinafter for brevity referred to as `Sessions Judge’s Court’), which after hearing both side, by its impugned judgment dated 16.11.2012, though dismissed the appeal, however, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years imposed on accused No.1 by the trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC was reduced to one year rigorous imprisonment. The other sentence ordered by the trial Court remained undisturbed.

5. It is challenging the said reduction of sentence of imprisonment by the Sessions Judge’s Court, the State has preferred Criminal Revision Petition No.306/2013, however, the accused No.1 has filed Criminal Revision Petition No.1186/20