J U D G M E N T

The appellant is the 1st accused in S.C.No.167 of 2003 on the file of the Additional District & Sessions Judge-Vadakara. He was tried for the offences punishable under Sections 332 and 307 read with Section 34 of IPC and was convicted for the sole offence punishable under Section 332 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. He was acquitted of charge under Section 307 of IPC. Being aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence, this appeal is preferred.

2. He was charge sheeted by the Sub Inspector of Police, Nadapuram, before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Nadapuram, along with the co-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 324, 332, 307 and 294(b) read with :-3-:

Section 34 IPC, on the allegation that the accused after sharing their common intention, wrongfully restrained PW1, a Police Constable who was a member of the Mobile Squad attached to Armed Force Battalion, Thrissur on 29.5.2000 at 8 p.m. and voluntarily caused hurt on him deterring his official duties in a public road in Nadapuram town by means of M.O.1 metal piece. Since the co- accused was not available and was reported to be absconding, the case against the appellant alone was committed to Court of Sessions, Kozhikode from where it came to be tried before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vadakara, where the charge was framed solely for the offences punishable under Sections 332 and 307 IPC which the appellant denied when it was read over and explained to him.

3. PWs.1 and 2 Police Constables were the :-4-:

members of mobile squad attached to Armed Force Battalion, Thrissur. PW6 Sub Inspector was the leader of the squad attached to the same Battalion. The prosecution case is that these officials while being engaged in mobile patrol duty came to the place of occurrence and after noticing that there was a traffic obstruction created following an accident involving a KSRTC bus and a lorry, directed the large crowd of persons assembled there to disperse. While so directing, the appellant along with the co-accused voluntarily caused hurt on PW1 by means of M.O.1 metal stone causing injuries on his body and escaped from the place along with the co-accused. Pws.2 and 6 present on the spot witnessed the incident of attack. Immediately, PW1, the injured was taken to the nearby Nadapuram Police Station where he gave Ext.P1 First Information before PW7 :-5-:

Sub Inspector. The crime was immediately registered and investigation was taken over by PW7. PW1 was taken to PW5, the Civil Surgeon at Nadapuram Government Hospital where Ext.P3 wound certificate concerning the injuries was prepared at 9.30 p.m. On the next date of incident, PW7 prepared Ext.P4 mahazar and caused Ext.P2 sketch plan to be prepared through the local Village Officer. The appellant was arrested on 31.7.2000 by PW7 during the course of the investigation of the crime and final report was submitted by his successor Sub Inspector, PW8.

4. The prosecution examined PWs.1 to 8 in support of the prosecution case and adduced Exts.P1 to P10 and M.O.1 in evidence. While the appellant was questioned under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., he said that he was falsely implicated in the crime and was not present at the spot at all.

:-6-:

Though he was called upon to enter on defence, he did not adduce any evidence.

5. The court below after hearing both parties and having examined the evidence on record, found that the evidence was not sufficient to prove the charge under Section 307 IPC against the appellant and accordingly he was acquitted. In respect of the charge under Section 332 IPC, the court below relied upon testimonies of PWs.1, 2 and 6 and found that they identified the appellant at the place of occurrence, despite the fact that the witnesses were not previously acquainted with him. It also found that there was no delay in the injured PW1 lodging the First Information before PW7, the Sub Inspector of Police and the injuries sustained by him were