The court upheld the conviction under IPC for involvement in assault, while modifying the sentence based on the circumstances of the case.

ORDER

The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 and 2 in C.C.No.1329/2006 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kunnamkulam. The learned Magistrate found the petitioners guilty of the commission of offences under Sections 341 , 323 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code , 1860, and convicted them thereunder. They were sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for one month under Section 341 IPC , Rigorous Imprisonment for three months under Section 323 , and Rigorous Imprisonment for six months and fine Rs.5,000/- each under Section 326 , by the Trial Court.

2. In the appeal, the learned Sessions Judge, Thrissur, altered the conviction under Section 326 IPC to one under Section 325 , and awarded sentence of Simple Imprisonment for three months each and fine Rs.3,000/- each for the said offence. So also, the punishment for the offence under Section 341 was reduced by the Appellate Court to a fine of Rs.500/-. The Appellate Court further directed that there need not be a separate sentence for the offence under Section 323 . It is the aforesaid verdict of the Appellate Court, which is under challenge in this revision.

3. The prosecution case is that, on 07.04.2006, at about 1.45 pm, the petitioners herein, along with another juvenile, attacked a person by name Subin, with a wooden block, and caused fractures to the lower jaw bone of that victim. It is alleged that the petitioners herein caught hold of the victim, and facilitated the assault of the juvenile, who hit the victim upon his jaw bones with the wooden log. Thereafter, the petitioners are also alleged to have beaten the victim upon his head and other parts of his body. The victim could not be examined as a witness before the Trial Court, since he died in a road accident. After analysing the evidence adduced by seven witnesses examined as PW1 to PW7, and three documents marked as Exts.P1 to P3, the learned Magistrate found the petitioners guilty of the offences under Sections 341 , 323 and 326 IPC , and awarded the punishment as stated above. The Appellate Court made a reappraisal of the entire evidence and found that the offence under Section 326 , cannot be said to be attracted in the absence of evidence showing the use of a dangerous weapon. Accordingly, the conviction was altered to one under Section 325 . The sentence of imprisonment and fine were awarded by the Appellate Court as stated in paragraph no.2 above.

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

5. It is true that the injured could not be examined as a witness in this case, since he passed away before the trial, as a result of a road traffic accident. However, PW1, the occurrence witness, clearly testified before the Trial Court about the physical assault mounted by the petitioners and the other person upon the victim. The Trial Court as well as the Appellate Court found the aforesaid evidence fully reliable. Having regard to the reasonings adopted by the courts below in the impugned judgments, and also the entire facts and circumstances borne out of the case records, I am of the view that the findings of the courts below about the involvement of the petitioners herein, in the commission of the offences alleged in this case, cannot be interfered with in exercise of the revisional powers of this Court. However, taking into account of the facts and circumstances of the case, gravity of the offence involved, and also the age of the accused at the relevant time of the commission of the Crime, I deem it appropriate to reduce the sentence of imprisonment awarded by the Appellate Court for the offence under Section 325 IPC to Simple Im