Allowed

K.S.Sukumaran v. State

Kerala HC14 Dec 2017Crl.Rev.Pet/1501/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court revised the conviction and sentence against multiple accused regarding offences under Sections 330, 348, 323, and 324 IPC. On the compoundable offences, the Court accepted the composition. Regarding Section 330 violence, finding evidence unclear, the Court acquitted the petitioners and set aside the conviction.

What did the court decide?

Conviction and sentence under Section 330 IPC set aside; composition under Sections 348, 323, 324 IPC accepted; accused found not guilty and released from prosecution; bail bond discharged.

K.S.Sukumaran Vs State — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/23RD AGRAHAYANA, 1939

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1501 of 2002 ( )

¶6

CRA 582/2000 of ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-I, ERNAKULAM

¶7

CC 678/1994 of J.M.F.C.-I, MUVATUPUZHA

¶8

PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.1 :-

¶9

K.S.SUKUMARAN, S/O.SREEDHARAN NAIR, POOVATHINKAL VEEDU, ULLANAKARA, BHARANANGANAM VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.GILBERT GEORGE CORREYA SRI.M.P.PRABHANANDAN

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT :-

¶12

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

¶13

BY SRI.C.M.KAMMAPPU, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14-12-2017, ALONG WITH CRRP. 1502/2002, CRRP. 1512/2002, CRRP. 1519/2002, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

rkj

¶16

P.UBAID, J.

¶17

================================

¶18

Crl.R.P.Nos.1501, 1502, 1512 & 1519 of 2002

¶19

================================

¶20

Dated this the 14^th day of December, 2017

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The revision petitioner in Crl.R.P.No.1501/2002 is the first accused in C.C.No.678/1994 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Muvattupuzha, the revision petitioner in Crl.R.P.No.1519/2002 is the second accused, the revision petitioners in Crl.R.P.No.1502/2002 are the accused Nos.4 and 16, and the revision petitioner in Crl.R.P.No.1512/2002 is the 12^th accused in the said case. The revision petitioners in these four revisions challenge the conviction and sentence under Sections 330, 348, 323 and 324 IPC. The trial court convicted and sentenced the accused Nos.1, 2, 4, 12, 15 and 16. They brought separate appeals before the Court of Session. In appeal, the appellate court acquitted the accused No.15. The conviction and sentence against the accused Nos.1, 2, 4, 12 and 16 was confirmed in appeal. Now the convicted accused

¶23

are before this Court, challenging the legality and propriety of the conviction and sentence.

¶24

Pending these revision petitions the accused

¶25

No.16 died, and thus the sentence as against him became

¶26

Crl.R.P.Nos.1501, 1502, 1512 & 1519 of 2002 2

¶27

unenforceable under the law. However, pending the

¶28

proceedings, the parties came to terms amicably out of Court. The entire dispute was settled forever between them, and the settlement was reported to Court. Accordingly, the parties were granted permission under Section 320(6) Cr.P.C to compound the compoundable offence. The parties filed composition along with the affidavit of the defacto complainant that the dispute stands settled forever, and thus the compoundable offences under Sections 348, 323 and 324 IPC are compounded. The composition is accepted by the Court. In such a circumstance, the accused are entitled for the benefit of acquittal as regards the offences under Sections 348, 323 and 324 IPC. On a perusal of the entire materials including the evidence given by the defacto complainant, I find that the evidence is not clear and satisfactory to prove the said offence beyond reasonable doubt. Though the prosecution examined so many witnesses such an offence stands not properly and legally proved. So, the accused are entitled for acquittal on merits as regards the offence under Section 330 IPC. The compoundable offences already stand compounded.

¶29

In the result, the composition made by the parties as regards the offences under Sections 348, 323 and 324 IPC is accepted and recorded. The revision petitioners (except the

¶30

¶31

Crl.R.P.Nos.1501, 1502, 1512 & 1519 of 2002

¶32

accused No.16) are found not guilty of the offence under Section 330 IPC, and accordingly, they are acquitted of the said offence in revision. The conviction and sentence against the revision petitioners under Section 330 IPC in C.C.No.678/1994 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Muvattupuzha, confirmed in appeal by the Court of Session, Ernakulam in Crl.Appeal Nos.579, 582, 585 and 590 of 2000 will stand set aside. In view of the composition accepted by the Court, the conviction and sentence against the revision petitioners under Sections 348, 323 and 324 IPC are set aside. Accordingly, the revision petitioners are released from prosecution as regards these offences on the benefit of acquittal under Section 320(8) Cr.P.C. The bail bond, if any, executed by the revision petitioners will stand discharged.

¶33

Sd/- P.UBAID, JUDGE

¶34

rkj

¶35

//TRUE COPY//

¶36

P.A. TO JUDGE

K.S.Sukumaran v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.S.Sukumaran v. State

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

Biju Vs State of Kerala

Radhamani Amma Vs the State of Kerala

Roy Jose Vs State of Kerala

Adv.P.T.Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Muhammad Sadiq Vs State of Kerala

Rajesh Vs Sub Inspector of Police