Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
G. GIRISH, J
THAIKANDY SREEDHARAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the petitioner was convicted for voluntary injury, and the evidence was evaluated for its sufficiency. (Para 1 , 3 , 5) |
| 2. the facts of the incident leading to the charge were established. (Para 2) |
| 3. arguments about the insufficiency of medical evidence were presented. (Para 4) |
| 4. the court issued a modified sentence based on the injury classification. (Para 6) |
ORDER
The concurrent verdicts of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thalassery, and the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc - III), Thalassery, convicting and sentencing the petitioner for the commission of the offence under Section 326 IPC are under challenge in this revision.
2. The prosecution case is that on 17.04.1999, at about 5.00 pm, the petitioner inflicted voluntary grievous hurt upon PW1, an octogenarian, by hitting him with a walking stick.
3. Before the Trial Court, the prosecution examined eight witnesses as PWs 1 to 8, and brought on record four documents as Exts.P1 to P4. The weapon of offence used by the accused was identified as MO1. Relying on the aforesaid evidence, the learned Magistrate found the petitioner guilty of Section 326 IPC and convicted him. The petitioner was sentenc
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
