The court confirmed earlier convictions while modifying the sentence to a fine based on the elapsed time since the offence.

ORDER

The concurrent findings of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Perambra, and the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track (Adhoc-I), Kozhikode, in C.C.No.222/2004 and in Crl.A.No.603/2006, respectively, convicting and sentencing the petitioner for the commission of offences under Sections 279 , 337 & 338 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, ‘ IPC ’), are under challenge in this revision petition.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he drove a KSRTC bus in a rash and negligent manner likely to endanger human life, on 29.03.2004, at about 01:30 pm, and caused the above said vehicle to hit PW2 and PW3, causing hurt and grievous hurt to them. The Trial Court sentenced the petitioner to simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 279 IPC , simple imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 337 and simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 338 . The Appellate Court upheld the aforesaid conviction and sentence. Aggrieved by the above concurrent verdicts of the courts below, the petitioner is here before this Court with this revision petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

4. The Trial Court relied on the evidence of PW2 & PW3 towards arriving at the finding that the petitioner had driven the KSRTC bus in a rash and negligent manner, leading to the accident in which they sustained injuries. The Appellate Court, after a re-apprisal of the aforesaid evidence, found that there was no reason to interfere with the findings of the learned Magistrate. On going through the impugned judgments of the courts below as well as the case records, I am of the view that the revisional powers of this Court cannot be exercised to dislodge the concurrent findings on facts of the courts below with regard to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the petitioner, resulting in the accident. Therefore, the conviction of the petitioner for the commission of the aforesaid offences, cannot be interfered with in this revision. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the elapse of more than two decades from the date of accident, I deem it appropriate to modify the sentence awarded to fine alone.

In the result, the revision petition stands allowed in part as follows:

(i)The concurrent findings of the courts below, convicting the petitioner for the commission of offences under Sections 279 , 337 & 338 of the IPC , are hereby confirmed.

(ii) In supersession of the sentence awarded by the courts below, the petitioner/accused is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) under Section 279 IPC , Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) under Section 337 and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) under Section 338 .

(iii) In default of payment of the total fine of Rs.2,500/- (Rupees two thousand five hundred only), the petitioner will undergo simple imprisonment for a term of three months.

(iv) The petitioner shall surrender before the Trial Court within a period of 30 days from today to make payment of fine as directed above.

The Registry shall transmit a copy of this order along with the case records to the Trial Court forthwith for enforcement of the sentence of fine imposed upon the petitioner.