The court affirmed previous convictions under IPC sections while modifying the sentence to fines, demonstrating judicial discretion in punishment assessment.

ORDER

The judgment rendered by the Additional Sessions Court - III, Kozhikode, in Crl.A.No.750 of 2009 confirming the conviction awarded by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court- I, Kozhikode, in S.T.No.1721 of 2006 and modifying the sentence awarded, is under challenge in this revision petition filed at the instance of the accused in the aforesaid case. The Trial Court convicted the petitioners under Sections 341 and 323 IPC , and sentenced them to undergo Simple Imprisonment for one month, and three months respectively. The Appellate Court reduced the punishment for the commission of the offence under Section 323 to Simple Imprisonment for 15 days, and fine Rs.750/- each. So also, the punishment for the commission of offence under Section 341 was reduced to fine Rs.500/- each. It is aggrieved by the aforesaid verdicts of the courts below that the petitioners are here before this Court with this revision.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

3. The Trial Court initiated the proceedings against the petitioners upon a private complaint filed by the 1^st respondent herein, who is no more. In the above private complaint, three witnesses were examined from the part of the complainant as PWs 1 to 3, and one document was marked as Ext.P1. No defence evidence was adduced from the part of the petitioners. The reasoning adopted by the Trial Court in the evaluation of the aforesaid evidence has been upheld by the Appellate Court. The concurrent findings of the courts below in the above regard, cannot be interfered with in this revision proceedings. It is not possible to say that the courts below had appreciated the evidence in a perverse manner or decided the case in utter disregard to any established principles of law. That being so, there is absolutely no scope for invoking the powers of this Court under Section 397 Cr.P.C., to unsettle the findings of the courts below. However, in the matter of sentencing, I am of the view that the prison term awarded by the courts below is liable to be excluded in the facts and circumstances of the case. The petitioners are liable to pay fine Rs.1,000/- each for the commission of offence under Section 323 IPC , and fine Rs.500/- each for the commission of the offence under Section 341 . Subject to the above modification in the sentence, the revision petition stands disposed of as follows :-

(i) The concurrent findings of the courts below, convicting the petitioners for the commission of the offences under Sections 341 and 323 IPC read with Section 34 , are hereby upheld.

(ii) In supersession of the sentence awarded by the courts below, the petitioners are sentenced to fine Rs.1,000/- (Rupees thousand only) each under Section 323 IPC , and fine Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) each under Section 341 .

(iii) In default of payment of the total fine of Rs.1,500/- (Rupees one thousand and five hundred only) each as directed above, the defaulters will undergo Simple Imprisonment for a term of one month.

(iv) The petitioners shall surrender before the Trial Court within a period of 30 days from today for the remittance of the fine amount as ordered by this Court.

Registry shall transmit the case records, along with a copy of this order, to the Trial Court forthwith for enforcing the revised sentence.

Sd/-