The court clarified that inconsistencies in testimonies and lack of clear intent negate convictions under serious charges, emphasizing the need for reliable evidence.

O R D E R

Both the accused in S.C.No.398/2000, who are accused no.5 and 6 in S.C.No.656/2001 on the file of the Sessions Court, Thalassery, are the revision petitioners herein. S.C.No.398/2000 arose from a case instituted on a police report and S.C.No.656/2001 on the basis of a private complaint. Crl.A.No.2080/2005 filed by the injured, namely PW1, has been not pressed and so the same has been dismissed.

2. The incident in this case is alleged to have taken place on

17/09/1998 at 6 p.m. Pursuant to the incident, PW1, the injured, was admitted in National Hospital, Kozhikode. He was unable to give a statement and hence PW8, the then ASI, Karikottakari Police Station recorded the statement of PW2, his wife, i.e., Ext.P1 FIS on 18/09/1998. On the basis of Ext.P1 FIS, Crime No.56/1998 was registered alleging the commission of offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 506(ii) read with Section 149 IPC. In Ext.P1 FIS, there is reference to six persons, i.e., A1, A2, A3, A5 and A6 in S.C.No.656/2001 and one Madhavan. After completion of investigation, PW13, the then C.I., Iritty, submitted the final report against two persons only, namely, Shaji (A1) and Viswanathan (A2) alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307 read with Section 34 IPC.

3. The final report was filed before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mattannoor, who committed the case to the Sessions Court, which was numbered as S.C.No.398/2000. PW1, the injured unhappy with the investigation being conducted, filed a private complaint on 12/05/1999 before the Magistrate concerned, i.e., before the final report in S.C.No.398/2000 had been filed. The learned Magistrate after completing the necessary formalities, took the case on file against six persons including the accused in S.C.No.398/2000 for commission of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 148, 341, 326 read with Section 149 IPC. The case was taken on file as C.P.No.26/2001 and thereafter the case was committed to the Sessions Court, which in turn took the case on file as S.C.No.656/2001. Even before the committal proceedings were initiated, the third accused, namely, K.C.Raghavan, died and hence charge against him was treated as abated and the case against the remaining accused was committed to the Sessions Court, Thalassery, which registered the case as S.C.No.656/2001.

4. When the accused in S.C.No.398/2000, i.e., Shaji (A1) and Viswanathan (A2) appeared on receipt of summons, the Sessions court framed a charge under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307 read with Section 149 IPC, which was read over and explained to the accused persons, to which they pleaded not guilty. When the accused in S.C.No.656/2001, i.e., Kunhikannan Nair (A1), Suresh (A2), K.C.Raghavan (A3), Radhakrishnan @ Babu (A4), Shaji (A5) and Viswanathan (A6), appeared before the Sessions Court, a charge under Section 143, 148, 341, 307 and 326 read with Section 149 IPC was framed, which was read over and explained to the accused persons, to which they pleaded not guilty. When the aforesaid cases came up for trial, the learned Public Prosecutor filed an application for joint trial, which was allowed by the trial court and thereafter the trial was conducted jointly.

5. On behalf of the prosecution PWs.1 to 12 were examined and Exts.P1 to P9 and MO1 was got marked. The accused on questioning under Section 313(1)(b) Cr.P.C. with regard to the incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the evidence of the prosecution, denied those circumstances and maintained their innocence.

6. As the court below did not find it a fit case to acquit the accused under Section 232 Cr.P.C., the accused was asked to enter on their defence and adduce evidence in support thereof. On behalf of the accused, DW1 was examined. By the impugned judgment dated 19/03/2005, the trial court found the first and the second accused in S.C.No.398/2000, who are the fifth and the sixth accused in S.C.No.656/2001 guilty. The fifth a