Kerala High Court
Shamsudeen vs State Of Kerala on 8 November, 2016
Author: B.Sudheendra Kumar
Bench: B.Sudheendra Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/17TH KARTHIKA, 1938
Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 878 of 2014 ()
-------------------------------
Crl.A 809/2012 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT - VII, ERNAKULAM
CC 341/2008 of J.M.F.C-1.,PERUMBAVOOR
REVISION PETITIONER/REVISION PETITIONERS:
--------------------------------------------------------------
1. SHAMSUDEEN,
S/O.MARACKAR,THELAYI HOUSE,PULIYAMBILLY BHAGOM,
VENGOLA,PERUMBAVOOR.
2. MARACKAR, THELAYI HOUSE,PULIYAMBILLY BHAGOM,
VENGOLA,PERUMBAVOOR.
3. NABEESA,
THELAYI HOUSE,PULIYAMBILLY BHAGOM, VENGOLA,PERUMBAVOOR.
BY ADVS.SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN
SRI.B.R.MURALEEDHARAN
SRI.SAIJO HASSAN
SRI.K.K.VINOD
SRI.K.V.SURESH
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:
------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA,ERNAKULAM,KOCHI-682031.
Addl.2 SUHARABHI, S/O.MUHAMED
ANIKKAT HOUSE, CHOWARA PO,
ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
ADDL.R.2 BY ADV. SMT.PRAMEELA.C.K.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SHRI RAMESH CHAND
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
8-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -
Crl.R.P. No.878 of 2014
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 8th day of November 2016
O R D E R
The revision petitioners were convicted under Section 498A read with Section 34 I.P.C. concurrently by the courts below.
2. Heard.
3. No material is available before the court to indicate that the appreciation of evidence or the concurrent finding by the courts below was perverse or incorrect. In the said circumstances, the concurrent finding of conviction by the courts below does not warrant any interference by this court.
Crl.R.P.878/2014 : 2 :
4. As regards the sentence, the learned counsel for the revision petitioners has pleaded for leniency. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioners that the matter has been settled between the parties and in the said circumstances, Crl.M.A.No. 6472 of 2016 has been filed jointly by the parties. It appears that an affidavit has been filed by PW1, who is the de-facto complainant in the case, stating that she is presently living with her husband, who is the first petitioner herein. It is further stated in the affidavit that she is residing with the revision petitioners harmoniously. Crl.M.A.No.6472 of 2016 is an application praying for permitting the parties to compound the offence. However, the offence under Section 498A is not compoundable under 320 Cr.P.C. In the said circumstances, the prayer in this regard cannot be allowed. However, the dispute involved in this case is only Crl.R.P.878/2014 : 3 :
a matrimonial dispute and presently, the parties are residing together. Since the parties are residing together harmoniously, I am of the view that it is only just and proper to reduce the sentence and accordingly the sentence awarded by the courts below under Section 498A read with Section 34 I.P.C. stands modified and reduced to a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for ten days each, to secure the ends of justice. Accordingly, I order so.
In the result, this revision petition stands allowed in part as above.
The revision petitioners shall surrender before the trial court on 1.12.2016 to suffer the sentence.
Sd/-
B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR,
dl/27.10..2016 JUDGE
// True Copy // PA to Judge