The conviction under IPC sections must reflect individual culpability and participation in the crime, requiring clear evidence for each accused according to their actions during the incident.

O R D E R

Accused Nos.1 to 8 in C.C.No.107/1993 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram are the revision petitioners herein. The revision petitioners were charge sheeted by the Sub Inspector of Police, Poojappura police station in Crime No.80/1992 of Poojappura police station under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 323, 324, 427 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code .

2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell was that on

25.06.1992 at about 10.30 p.m by the side of Tagore road in Trikannapuram ward while PW1 was going through that road in his motor cycle with No.KBV 686, the revision petitioners formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the common object of attacking him and they assembled there with that object with deadly weapons like iron rod and stick and when PW1 reached there, first revision petitioner shouting that they were waiting for him and had beaten on his head with an iron rod and due to that he fell down and thereafter, revision petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 beat him with stick and others beaten him with hands and thereafter, revision petitioner Nos. 7 and 8 broke the motor cycle and caused damage to the tune of Rs.150/- and thereby, all of them have committed the offence punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 323, 324, 427 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code . After investigation, final report was filed and it was taken on file as C.C.No.107/1993 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram.

3. When the revision petitioners appeared before the court below, after hearing both sides, charge under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 323, 324, 427 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code was framed and the same was read over and explained to them and they pleaded not guilty. In order to prove the case of the prosecution, PWs 1 to 9 were examined and Exts. P1 to P11 were marked on their side. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the revision petitioners were questioned under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure and they denied all the incriminating circumstances brought against them in the prosecution evidence. They have further stated that, they have not committed any offence and they have been falsely implicated in the case on account of previous enmity as PW1 and PW4 along with others attacked first revision petitioner and others and caused injury to him and a case was registered in respect of that incident and in order to wreck vengeance, they were falsely implicated in the case. Except marking D1 series contradictions in the evidence of PW4, no other defence evidence was adduced on their side.

4. After considering the evidence on record, the trial court convicted the revision petitioners for the offence under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, and Section 427 of Indian Penal Code and convicted them thereunder and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months each for the offence under Section 143 of and further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each under Sections 147 , 148 and 149 of and further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each for the offence under Section 323 of and further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one and half years and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months each under Section 324 of and further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month each under of and directed the sentences to run concurrently. If is further ordered, if the fine amount is realised, an amount of Rs.5,000/- be paid to PW1 as compensation under Section 357 (1)(b) of Code of Criminal Procedure. Aggrieved by the same, they filed Crl.Appeal No.182/1999 before the Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram which was made over to Additional Sessions Court (Adhoc) No.II, Thiruvananthapuram for disposal and the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismiss