KURUNNU ALIAS v. STATE OF KERALA
Case at a glance
Outcome
Conviction upheld
Hence, the conviction is confirmed
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 294(b), 506(1)
Judgment
K.R. UDAYABHANU, J=================================CRL. R.P. NO. 260 OF 1999=================================Dated this the 23rd day of May 2007O R D E R The revision petitioner stands convicted for the offencesunder Sections 294(b) and 506(1) of IPC and sentenced toundergo rigorous imprisonment for two months for the offenceunder Section 294(b) IPC and rigorous imprisonment for sixmonths for the offence under Section 506(1) IPC. Theprosecution case is that the accused/revision petitioner on12.09.1995 at 7.30 a.m., with the intention of intimidating CW1abused and threatened her. 2. The evidence adduced in the matter consisted of thetestimony of PWs 1 to 5 and Exts. P1 to P3. PW1 is thecomplainant, PW2 is an eye witness and PW3 is anotheroccurrence witness who turned hostile. I find that the evidenceof PWs 1 and 2 stands not discredited as such. The incident hadtaken place in a path way. In view of the concurrent findings andthe evidence adduced, I find no reason to interfere in the findingsof the courts below. Hence, the conviction is confirmed. CRL. R.P. NO. 260/1999: 2 :3. So far as the sentence is concerned, the counsel for therevision petitioner is pleaded for leniency pointing out that theincident has taken place more than 10 years ago and that so farthe revision petitioner has been facing the proceedings and livingunder the shadow of incarceration. In the circumstances I findthat the sentence is liable to be modified. The sentence imposedon the accused is modified to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- for theoffence under Section 294(b) IPC and in default to undergosimple imprisonment for three months and also to pay a fine ofRs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 506(1) IPC and indefault to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. Therevision petitioner is granted two months time from todayonwards to remit the fine amount. The Crl.R.P is disposed of accordingly. K.R. UDAYABHANU, JUDGE.rv CRL. R.P. NO. 260/1999: 3 :
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Hence, the conviction is confirmed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 294(b), 506(1).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Kerala High Court, on 23 May 2007. The bench was K R UDAYABHANU.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.