The legal principles of unlawful assembly and intent to promote disharmony between communities were upheld, emphasizing the significance of evidential support in conviction.

ORDER

The concurrent findings of the Special Judicial First Class Magistrate (Marad Cases), Kozhikode, and the Additional Sessions Court, Fast Track (Adhoc-II), Kozhikode, in C.C.No.4 of 2004 and in Crl.A.No.363 of 2004 respectively, convicting and sentencing the petitioner (2^nd accused) for the commission of the offences under Sections 143 and 153A IPC read with Section 149 , are under challenge in this revision petition.

2. The prosecution case is that on 04.01.2002 at about 04.05 pm, the petitioner, along with 11 other persons, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the common object of promoting disharmony, feeling of ill will and hatred between Hindus and Muslims, committed rioting and took procession exhorting others to attack Hindus, and thereby committed the aforesaid offences. The Sub Inspector of Police, Beypore, had filed the Final Report alleging the commission of the offences underSections 143, 147 and 153A IPC read withSection 149IPC against the petitioner and 11 other accused.

3. In the trial before the learned Special Judicial Magistrate, 14 witnesses were examined as PWs 1 to 14, and 13 documents were marked as Exts.P1 to P13 from the part of the prosecution. The accused did not opt to adduce any defence evidence. It is by relying on the aforesaid evidence that the learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that the petitioner, along with the other accused, committed the offences under Sections 143 and 153A IPC read with Section 149 . Accordingly, the accused were sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for three months under Section 143 , and Rigorous Imprisonment for one year under Section 153A read with . Though the petitioner and the other accused challenged the aforesaid verdict in appeal before the Additional Sessions Court, Fast Track (Adhoc-II), Kozhikode, the learned Additional Sessions Judge upheld the findings of the learned Magistrate, and confirmed the conviction and sentence. Aggrieved by the above concurrent verdicts of the courts below, the petitioner is here before this Court with this revision.

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

5. The Trial Court placed heavy reliance upon the evidence of PWs 1 to 3 to arrive at the conclusion that the petitioner, along with the other accused, committed the offences under Sections 143 and 153A IPC read with Section 149 . PWs 1 to 3 are the Police personnels, who were on the patrol duty at the relevant time, when the offence was detected. They have arrested the petitioner and the others on the spot and initiated proceedings against them. The evidence adduced in the above regard has been relied on by the Trial Court as well as the Appellate Court to come to the finding that the prosecution has successfully established the offences under and 153A . The concurrent findings of the courts below in the above regard cannot be interfered with in exercise of the revisional jurisdiction of this Court, since there is absolutely no manifest illegality in the findings or perversity in the appreciation of the evidence. Therefore, the conviction for the offences under and 153A can only be upheld.

6. Coming to the sentence awarded by the Trial Court and the Appellate Court, it appears that the Rigorous Imprisonment for one year awarded for the commission of the offence under Section 153A IPC , is liable to be reduced to Simple Imprisonment for three months, taking into account the fact that, at the time when the petitioner and others were booked for the commission of the above offence, they did not resort to any violence. So also, the punishment of Rigorous Imprisonment awarded for the offence under Section 143 is liable to be reduced to Simple Imprisonment for the period of three mo