Concurrent findings of fact by lower courts based on reliable evidence need not be interfered with in criminal revision.

O R D E R

The fifth accused in C.C.No.470/2001 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kolencherry, is the revision petitioner herein. He, along with other 19 accused, were convicted and sentenced by the learned Magistrate, for the commission of offences under Sections 143, 147, 447, 427, 323 & 341 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, ‘IPC') to remit fines of various amounts ranging from Rs.100/- to Rs.1,000/- with default clauses of simple imprisonments of various tenures. Though the aforesaid verdict of the learned Magistrate was challenged in appeals by the petitioner herein and accused Nos. 1 to 4, 6 to 10, 12 to 15 & 18 to 20, the Appellate Court refused to interfere with the findings of the learned Magistrate as against accused Nos.1 to 5, 7 & 8. However, the other appellants were acquitted by the Appellate Court. Aggrieved by the above concurrent verdicts of the courts below, the petitioner/fifth accused is here before this Court with this revision petition.

2. The prosecution case is that on 17.11.2000, at about 05:30 p.m, the petitioner, along with the other accused, criminally trespassed into the landed property of PW1 to PW3, and committed mischief by cutting open a new road. It is further alleged that the petitioner and the other accused resorted to wrongful restraint and physical assault upon PW1 & PW2, who tried to resist the criminal acts of the accused.

3. In the trial before the learned Magistrate, the prosecution examined seven witnesses as PW1 to PW7, and brought on record five documents as Exts P1 to P5. From the part of the accused, one witness was examined as DW1 and one document was marked as Ext D1. After analysing the above evidence, the learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that the accused Nos. 1 to 20 committed the offences under Sections 143, 147, 447, 427, 323 & 341 read with Section 149 IPC and convicted them thereunder. They were awarded a sentence of fine of Rs.500/- each for the offences under Section 143, 147, 427 & 447 IPC, and Rs.100/- each for the offence under Section 341 IPC. For the offence under Section 323 IPC, the accused were sentenced to fine of Rs.1,000/- each. Default clauses of simple imprisonment for various tenures were fixed for non-payment of the aforesaid fine. The Appellate Court, after a re-appraisal of the evidence on record, found that there was absence of evidence to connect the accused Nos.6, 9, 10, 12 to 15 and 18 to 20, and accordingly acquitted the aforesaid accused. The conviction recorded and the sentence awarded upon the accused Nos.1 to 5, 7 & 8 by the Trial Court were upheld by the Appellate Court. Now that, in the present petition, the petitioner/fifth accused challenges the concurrent verdicts of the courts below, convicting and sentencing him for the commission of the aforesaid offences.

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

5. Among the witnesses examined from the part of the prosecution, the Appellate Court placed heavy reliance upon the testimonies of PW1 to PW3 to arrive at the conclusion that the petitioner herein and accused Nos.1 to 4 and 7 & 8 had committed the offences alleged against them. Among the above witnesses, PW1 & PW2 are the injured, and PW3 is the person who came to the spot seeing the violence perpetrated by the accused. The Trial Court as well as the Appellate Court held that the relationship of PW2 & PW3, who were the children of PW1, is not a reason to discard the evidence tendered by them. Both the courts held that the testimonies of PW1 to PW3 clearly brought out the offence alleged against the petitio