O R D E R

The revision petitioner is the accused in Sessions Case No.75/1995 wherein the alleged offence is under Section 307 of IPC. He was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigours imprisonment for two years. The conviction and sentence was challenged in Crl. Appeal No.227/2000 on the files of the Additional Sessions Court (Spl), Kottayam which was also not successful. Aggrieved by the above concurrent findings, this Crl. R.P. is filed.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted before this court that the conviction is under Section 307 of IPC. It is the submission that by no stretch of imagination, it can be said that the revision petitioner committed an offence under Section 307 IPC. It is the submission that even if, for argument sake, it is considered that the revision petitioner was the person who committed the overt act, the only offence that can be made out will be not one under Section 307 of IPC, but a lesser offence alone. It is submitted that the main ingredient of Section 307 IPC is the intention to commit murder. Intention is lacking in this case. In this regard, the learned counsel submitted before this court that PW6, the doctor categori