Allowed

Reji v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Dec 2012Crl.Rev.Pet/1577/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a revision petition challenging conviction and sentence for arson under IPC 435, the High Court modified the sentence. It restricted imprisonment to until the rising of the court and increased the fine to Rs. 12,500, directing payment of Rs. 15,000 as compensation to the victim.

What did the court decide?

Imprisonment restricted till rising of court; fine increased to Rs. 12,500 each; Rs. 15,000 compensable to victim; default sentence of three months' imprisonment.

Reji Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/26TH AGRAHAYANA 1934

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1577 of 2002 (B)

¶6

[CRL.A.NO.215/1999 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT,KOTTAYAM, C.C.NO.48/1998 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II KOTTAYAM]

¶7

REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:

¶8

1. REJI, S/O. THAMPI, KOTTAMURI, KUDAYAMPADI, MARIYATHURUTHU, AYMANAM.

¶9

2. XAVIER @ JOY, S/O. VARGHESE, ACHINAKOM, VECHOOR VILLAGE.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.SURESH BABU THOMAS, SRI.P.RAVINDRA BABU.

¶11

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. BIJU MEENATTOOR.

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17-12-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Prv.

¶16

S. SIRI JAGAN, J.

¶17

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl. Rev. Petition No.1577 of 2002

¶18

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17^th day of December, 2012

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The petitioners are the accused in Calendar Case No.48/1998 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Kottayam. They were prosecuted for offences punishable under Section 435 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case was that on 18.08.1995, at about 11.30 P.M., the accused with the common intention to cause damage to the property of PW1, set fire to her grocery shop situated in House No.664 of Ward No.8 of Aymanam Panchayat, causing a damage of Rs.15,000/-. The prosecution examined PWs 1 to 6 and marked Exhibits P1 to P3 and MO I & II. The defence marked Ext.D1, which is a portion of 161 statement of one of the witnesses. After considering the evidence adduced, the Magistrate convicted the petitioners and sentenced them to undergo simple

¶21

Crl. Rev. Petition No.1577 of 2002

¶22

-2-

¶23

imprisonment for one month each and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each, with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for one month each. The fine amount on recovery was directed to be paid to PW1 as compensation under Section 437 of the Cr.P.C. The petitioners filed Crl. Appeal No.215/1999 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Kottayam, who confirmed the conviction and sentence. The petitioners are challenging the judgments of the courts below.

¶24

After arguing for sometime, the learned counsel for the petitioners confines relief for leniency in the matter of punishment. It is submitted that the sentence of imprisonment may be dispensed with and the sentence may be confined to fine.

¶25

I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor also on this point.

¶26

After hearing both sides, I am of opinion that the sentence of imprisonment can be restricted to one till the rising of the court and the fine can be increased to

¶27

Crl. Rev. Petition No.1577 of 2002

¶28

-3-

¶29

Rs.12,500/- each. Accordingly, the sentence is modified as follows:

¶30

The petitioners shall undergo simple imprisonment till rising of the court and they shall pay a fine of Rs.12,500/- each, in default of payment of which, the petitioners shall undergo simple imprisonment for three months. Out of the fine amount, an amount of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) shall be paid to PW1 as compensation. The petitioners shall appear before the Magistrate for undergoing the sentence of imprisonment on 21.01.2013, after paying the fine amount. The Magistrate shall keep the execution of the sentence in abeyance till then.

¶31

The Crl.R.P. is disposed of as above.

¶32

Sd/S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE

¶33

shg/

Reji v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reji v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K. Kallyani Vs State

Sibichan Vs State of Kerala

P.Raman Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer & Sub Divisionalmagistrate

T.M.Prabhakaran Vs Smt. Roopkala Jagath

Chendankulangara Ummer Vs U.Hassan

Mahesh Vs State of Kerala