Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 55584
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
C.S. Sudha, J
BABILESH AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. BALAKRISHNAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.A NO. 186 OF 2016
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR
For the Respondents: SMT.SHEEBA THOMAS
The court upheld the conviction of the accused for unlawful assembly and assault but acquitted them of culpable homicide due to insufficient evidence of intent.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 143, 148, 324, and 308 read with Section 149 - Conviction of accused for unlawful assembly and causing injuries - The court confirmed the conviction of two accused for offences under IPC sections mentioned, while acquitting them of culpable homicide not amounting to murder due to insufficient evidence. (Paras 1-16)
(B) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 374(2) - Appeal against conviction - The court evaluated whether the trial court's conviction and sentence were sustainable based on the evidence presented. (Paras 8-9)
Facts of the case:
The accused formed an unlawful assembly and attacked the victim, causing injuries during a dispute related to a student. The trial court acquitted some accused but convicted two for specific offences.
Findings of Court:
The trial court's conviction of the accused for offences under IPC was upheld, but they were acquitted of the charge under Section 308 IPC due to lack of evidence.
Issues: The court addressed the sustainability of the conviction and the adequacy of evidence regarding the charges against the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that while there was evidence of unlawful assembly and assault, the prosecution failed to prove the intent to commit culpable homicide beyond reasonable doubt.
Result: Appeal partly allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accused charged with unlawful assembly and assault. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. appeal focuses on sustainability of conviction. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. testimony of pw1 is crucial despite hostile witnesses. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 4. conviction under section 324 ipc supported by medical evidence. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 5. sentencing aims to deter similar future offenses. (Para 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT
In this appeal filed under Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C., the appellant who is accused no.1 and 3 in SC.No.1397 of 2014 on the file of the Court of Session, Kozhikode, challenges the conviction entered and sentence passed against them for the offences punishable under Sections 143 , 148 , 324 and 308 read with Section 149 IPC .
2. The prosecution case is that the accused persons, six in number, due to their enmity towards PW1, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly armed with dangerous weapons and in furtherance of their common object of voluntarily causing hurt and grievous hurt to PW1, on 09/02/2014 at 05:00 p.m., wrongfully restrained him, abused him and threatened him with dire consequences. First accused (A1) with a stone hit PW1 on his head. The second accused (A2) kicked PW1 on his abdomen. The third accused (A3) with an iron rod hit him on his head at which time PW1 caught hold of the rod. Accused no.4, 5 and 6 (A4, A5 and A6) beat PW1 on his face and body resulting in deep injuries on his head and forehead. PW1 sustained injuries on his face and body as well. Had PW1 not caught hold of the iron rod with which A3 had attempted to beat him, he would have received a severe blow on his head resulting in a fatal injury. Hence the accused persons, six in number, as per the final report were alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 341, 294(b), 506 Part I, 323 , 324 and 308 read with Section 149 IPC .
3. Crime No. 103/2014, Kuttiady police station, that is, Ext.P8 FIR was registered by PW12, Assistant Sub Inspector, on the basis of Ext.P1 statement of PW1. PW13, Sub Inspector of Police conducted the initial investigation. Thereafter the investigation was taken over by PW11, who completed the investigation and submitted the final report before the court alleging the commission of the offences punishable under the above mentioned Sections.
4. On appearance of all the accused persons, the jurisdictional magistrate after complying with all the necessary formalities contemplated under Section 209 Cr.P.C., committed the case to the Court of Session, Kozhikode. The case was taken on file as S.C.No.1397/2014 and thereafter made over to the Special Additional Sessions Judge (Marad Cases), Kozhikode for trial and disposal. The trial court on 25/08/2015 framed a charge for the offences punishable under Sections 143 read with Section 149 IPC , 148, 341, 324, 506(i) and 308 , which was read over and explained to the accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty.
5. On behalf of the prosecution, PW1 to PW13 were examined and Exts.P1 to P12 were got marked in support of the case. After the close of the prosecution evidence, the accused no.1 to 6 were questioned under Section 313(1)(b) with regard to the incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the evidence of the prosecution. The accused persons denied all those circumstances and maintained their innocence.
6. As the trial court did not find it a fit case to acquit the accused under 232 Cr.P.C., they were asked to enter on their defence and adduce evidence in support thereof. No oral and documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the accused.
7. On a consideration of the oral and documentary evidence and after hearing both sides, the trial court by the impugned judgment acquitted A2 and A4 to A6 under Section 235 (1) Cr.P.C. of all the offences charged against them. However, A1 and A3 have been found guilty of the offences punishable under Section 143 , 148 , 324 and 308 read with Section 149 IPC . They have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment
