The evidentiary standard for sections related to grievous hurt was met, relying on consistent and corroborative witness statements.

O R D E R

The revision petitioner herein is the 1st accused in C.C No.126/1999 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Idukki. He and his wife faced prosecution in the court below under Section 326 I.P.C on the allegation that at about 6 p.m on 26.11.1997 on the mud road near the property of one Raju at Thopramkudy, they poured acid on the body of the de facto complainant Sunil Kumar due to some previous enmity, and thus inflicted severe burn injuries on his body. The Police registered the crime on the first information statement given by the said Sunil Kumar and after investigation, the Police submitted final report in court.

2. The two accused appeared before the learned Magistrate and pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against them under Section 326 I.P.C read with Section 34 I.P.C. The prosecution examined ten witnesses and proved Exts.P1 to P8 documents in the trial court. The MO1 to MO3 material objects were also identified during trial.

When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C, the accused denied the incriminating circumstances and projected a defence of total denial. They examined a witness in defence and also proved Exts.D1 to D10 contradictions in the statements of some material witnesses.

3. On an appreciation of the evidence, the trial court found the 2nd accused not guilty, and accordingly she was acquitted. But the 1st accused was found guilty. On conviction under Section 326 I.P.C, he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of ₹5000/-.

4. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated

4.12.2002, the accused approached the Court of Session, Thodupuzha with Crl.A 253/2002. In appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge for NDPS cases) Thodupuzha confirmed the conviction and sentence and accordingly dismissed the appeal. Now the accused is before this court in revision challenging the legality and propriety of the conviction and sentence.

5. On hearing both sides, and on a perusal of the materials, I find no reason for interference in the findings or the conviction made by the courts below concurrently against the accused, on the ground of any illegality or irregularity.

6. Of the ten witnesses examined in the trial court, PW1 is the de facto complainant who sustained injuries in the incident, and PW2 is his mother. PW3, examined to prove the incident, did not support the prosecution. PW4 has only hear-say information about the incident. PW5 was examined to prove some res gestae elements regarding the complicity of the accused. PW8 is the Doctor who examined the injured at the hospital and issued the Ext.P5 wound certificate. The main witnesses in this case are PW1, PW2, PW5 and PW8.

7. According to PW1, the alleged incident happened while he and his mother were coming home through the Panchayat road near the house of Raju. The F.I Statement will show that the mother of PW1 had also witnessed the whole incident. The evidence given by PW1 and PW2 is definite and consistent that while they were walking through the narrow Panchayat road, the 1st accused unexpectedly poured acid on the body of PW1 from a bucket. PW1 sustained extensive burn injuries and without any delay, he was taken to the hospital. When he cried aloud, people came there, and on seeing them, the accused ran off and escaped. The evidence of PW5 is that while he was sitting at the tea-shop of Lissiamma, PW1 rushed to the shop crying aloud and with extensive burn injuries on his body. When asked about it, he stated that the 1st accused had poured acid on his body. This is the statement given by PW1 to PW5, immediately after the incident and this statement implicates the 1st accused. This statement retold by PW1 can be accepted as res gestae evidence, and that is admissible in evidence. I find no reason to reject the evidence of PW5 or to disbelieve him.

8. PW8 has given evidence regarding the extensive burn injuries found on the body of PW1. He had acid burns “over the left side of the body involving