Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Kerala High Court

Devassia vs State Of Kerala on 17 April, 2007

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT:

        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

    MONDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/12TH MAGHA, 1937

                  Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2234 of 2007 ( )
                    -------------------------
  AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CRA 701/2005 of ADDL.DISTRICT AND
       SESSIONS COURT FAST TRACK (ADHOC), MAVELIKKARA,
                        DATED 17-04-2007

  AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CC 97/2004 of J.M.F.C., KAYAMKULAM
                        DATED 22-10-2005

REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
--------------------------------------

      DEVASSIA, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O. DEVASSIA,
      PODYMATTATHIL VEEDU, ATHIRAMPUZHA VILLAGE,
      MANNAMKARA
      KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

      BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
--------------------------------------

      STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
      PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
      (CR.NO.35 OF 2004 OF KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION).

           PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. R. GITHESEH


      THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON    01-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:



                B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.
             .....................................................
                 Crl.R.P. No. 2234 of 2007
             .....................................................
         Dated this the 1st day of February, 2016


                                 ORDER

The accused in C.C. No. 97 of 2004 on the files of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kayamkulam, filed this Revision Petition challenging the concurrent finding of conviction and sentence passed by the courts below under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of IPC.

2. Heard.

3. The prosecution allegation is that on 19-1- 2004 at about 7.15 p.m., the revision petitioner drove the KSRTC bus bearing Reg. No. along the public road in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life and when it reached near Texmo junction, Kayalkulam, it hit against the scooter ridden by PW2  -: 2 :- Crl.R.P. No. 2234 of 2007 with PW3 as the pillion rider and consequently, both PW2 and PW3 sustained injuries.

3. Before the trial Court, PW1 to PW10 were examined and Exts. P1 to P9 were marked for the prosecution. No evidence was adduced for the revision petitioner.

4. The courts below correctly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution and concurrently found that the revision petitioner committed the offence under Sections 279, 337 and 338 IPC, repelling the contentions of the revision petitioner. No circumstance has been brought to my notice to indicate that the concurrent finding of conviction by the courts below is perverse or incorrect. In the said circumstances, the concurrent finding by the courts below that the revision petitioner committed the offence under Sections 279, 337 and 338 IPC, does not warrant any interference by this Court.

5. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner has pleaded for leniency in the matter of sentence. The revision petitioner was aged 43 years during the relevant time. Presently, the revision petitioner is aged 55 years. PW3 sustained simple injury in the incident whereas PW2 sustained injuries including fracture. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the sentence awarded by the courts below can be modified and reduced to a fine of `1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) and in default to simple imprisonment for 10 days under Section 279 IPC, a fine of Rs. 500/- (Rupees five hundred only) and in default to simple imprisonment for 5 days under Sec. 337 IPC and imprisonment till the rising of the Court and a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) and in default to simple imprisonment for one month under Sec. under Sec. 338 IPC, to meet the ends of justice and accordingly, I order so. In the event of realisation of the compensation amount, the entire amount shall be given to PW2 under Sec. 357 (3) Cr.P.C.

6. In the result, this Revision Petition stands allowed in part as above.

The revision petitioner shall surrender before the trial court on 16-3-2016 to suffer the sentence.

Sd/-B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE.

ani/2/2/2016 /truecopy/ P.S. toJudge