SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 14309

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
G.GIRISH, J
LAKSHMANAN PARAKKALAM HOUSE, THATHAMANGALAM, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.REV.PET NO. 1658 OF 2007



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.VINOD KUMAR.C
For the Respondents: SRI JAYAKRISHNAN U., PP

The court may modify a sentence for a minor offense based on elapsed time since the offense and previous time served, emphasizing justice over rigidity.

Headnote:The conviction of the petitioner under Section 51(a) of the Kerala Police Act, 1960, by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court was upheld following a plea of guilty. Despite previous imprisonment, considering the time elapsed since the offense, the court modified the sentence to a fine of Rs.200/- with a default of Simple Imprisonment. The primary issues framed involved the appropriateness of the sentence despite the guilty plea, with the court emphasizing the lack of significant intervention warranted by the facts presented. The final ruling reflected the need to balance justice with the realities of case timing, resulting in a fine rather than further imprisonment.

ORDER

The petitioner herein was convicted and sentenced by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chittur, in S.T.No.1186/2004 for the commission of offence under Section 51 (a) of the Kerala Police Act , 1960. The aforesaid conviction was recorded following the petitioner pleading guilty while the particulars of offence were read over to him. The learned Magistrate sentenced him to undergo Simple Imprisonment for 15 days, and to pay a fine of Rs.50/- with a default clause of Simple Imprisonment for 3 days. Though the aforesaid verdict was challenged by the petitioner before the Sessions Court, Palakkad, in Crl.Appeal No.148/2004, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, who considered the Crl.Appeal, declined to interfere with the findings of the learned Magistrate. Aggrieved by the above concurrent verdicts of the courts below, the petitioner is here before this Court with this revision.

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

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 18.11.2003 at about 10.p.m, he was found in an inebriated condition, unable to take care of himself, and behaved in disorderly manner at a public place. It is seen from the impugned judgment of the Trial Court that the petitioner pleaded guilty on 22.03.2004, when the learned Magistrate read over the particulars of offence to him. It is observed by the learned Magistrate in the impugned order that the petitioner was explained of the consequences of pleading guilty, since the imprisonment for a period of 15 days was mandatory as per the provisions contained in Section 51 (a) of the Kerala Police Act , 1961.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had already undergone imprisonment for three days, consequent to the above sentence awarded by the Trial Court. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, as well as the elapse of more than two decades from the date of offence, I deem it appropriate to set aside the sentence of imprisonment awarded by the Trial Court and which was upheld by the Appellate Court, subject to the payment of maximum fine provided for the aforesaid offence.

With the above modification of the sentence, the revision stands disposed of as follows:

1) The concurrent findings of the courts below, convicting the petitioner for the commission of offence under Section 51 (a) of the Kerala Police Act ,1960, are hereby upheld.

2) In supersession of the sentence awarded by the courts below, the petitioner is sentenced to fine of Rs.200/- (Rupees Two hundred only) with a default clause of Simple Imprisonment for one week.

3) The petitioner shall surrender before the Trial Court within a period of 30 days from today to remit the fine amount ordered by this Court.

4) If the petitioner had remitted any amount as fine following the judgments of the Trial Court or the Appellate Court, then he need to remit only the balance amount, after deducting the fine already paid from the amount of Rs.200/- imposed as fine by this Court.

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

sd/

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top