ORDER : (A. Badharudeen, J.) : This revision petition has been filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred as Cr.P.C. for convenience) challenging the judgment dated 24.04.2023 in Crl.A. No.37/2022 on the files of the Additional District and Sessions Court, Vatakara arising out of the judgment dated 29.12.2021 in C.C. No.1128/2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Vatakara. The petitioners herein are the accused in the above case. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor, in detail, so as to exercise the limited power of revision available to this Court, where the trial court and the First Appellate Court concurrently found that the accused/petitioners herein committed offences punishable under Section 23 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 [hereinafter referred as ‘JJ Act’ for short] and Section 324 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred as ‘IPC’ for short), though the Appellate Court modified the sentence imposed to a lesser degree. 3. In this matter, the prosecution case is that, in between 1/1/2012 and 5/8/2014 the accused who were in actual charge and control over the juvenile victim, willfully neglected juvenile victim and made her to do household works, beat her using stick and hands and caused burn injuries and grievous hurt on her abdomen, face and leg using hot iron rod or spatula. On this premise, both accused alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Section 23 of the JJ Act and Section 324 of IPC. 4. The trial court secured the presence of accused for trial and finally tried the matter. During trial, PWs1 to 13 examined and Exts.P1 to P9 marked on the side of the prosecution. After questioning the accused under Section 313(1)(b) of the Cr.P.C., when opportunity was given, no witness examined and exhibits marked on the side of the accused. 5. On appreciation of evidence, the trial court convicted and sentenced the accused as under: 1. Both accused are sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of 6 months u/S.23 of Juvenile Justice Act 2000. 2. Both accused are further sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of 2 years u/S.324 of IPC. 3. Both accused are undergone judicial custody from 17/9/14 to 1/10/14 during crime stage. Hence they are entitled to get set off u/S.428 Cr.P.C as per law. 4. 2. Both accused are further sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of 2 years u/S.324 of IPC. 3. Both accused are undergone judicial custody from 17/9/14 to 1/10/14 during crime stage. Hence they are entitled to get set off u/S.428 Cr.P.C as per law. 4. Substantive sentences of imprisonment shall run concurrently. 6. When, the accused challenged the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court, before the First Appellate Court, the First Appellate Court confirmed the conviction and modified the sentence as under: a) The conviction of both appellants for the offence under section 23 of the JJ Act, 2000 and for the offence under section 324 of the IPC are confirmed. b) The sentence for the offence under section 23 of the JJ Act, is reduced to simple imprisonment for three months. c) The sentence for the offence under section 324 of IPC is reduced to simple imprisonment for six months. d) Both accused are entitled to set off for the period from 07.09.2014 to 01.10.2014 u/s.428 of the Cr.PC. e) The substantive sentence shall run concurrently. 7. Challenging the verdicts of conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court as well as the Appellate Court, this revision petition has been filed. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners/accused, the evidence given by the PW9 doctor, relying on Ext.P5 wound certificate, does not suggest any burn injuries, though the prosecution alleges that the victim was subjected to burn injuries. He also submitted that, there was no materials placed by the prosecution to show how the minor reached the residence of the accused. On the above grounds he sought for interference in the verdicts under challenge or atleast as an alternative, prayed for substantive reduction in sentence. 8. The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that the concurrent finding entered by the trial court while entering conviction could not be interfered, since the evidence as that of PW1 child and other witnesses including PW9 the doctor, would suggest serious injuries in consequence of the overt acts alleged against the accused, who subjected PW1, a minor aged 7 years to cruelty and ordeals mercilessly. 9. 9. In this matter, PW1 supported the prosecution case by narrating the ordeals she suffered while she was in actual charge and control of the accused and PW9, the doctor who was examined to prove the injuries supported, Ext.P5 wound certificate, suggesting that the victim sustained a linear wound scar on the right elbow, a heal scar 6x2 cm over front of the neck, a healed linear scar on the left side of the face, a heal scar on the left inguinal region 4 cm long and five meter scar on the upper part of thigh. Although, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners/accused that, no burn injuries noted in the wound certificate, healed scar and healed injuries were noted as stated above. In this case, it is to be noted that, the last occurrence was on 05.08.2014 and the doctor examined the victim only on 27.08.2014. Thus, by the time the wounds were in a healed condition. Hence, this argument would not save the petitioners, in any manner. 10. Coming to the ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 23 of the JJ Act, assaults, abandons, exposes or wilfully neglect of the juvenile or causes or procures him to be assaulted, abandoned, exposed or neglected in a manner likely to cause such juvenile or the child unnecessary mental or physical suffering to be done by the person/persons having the actual charge or control over a juvenile or a child. Similarly, in order to constitute an offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC, the acts of voluntarily causes hurt by means of any instrument likely to cause death or injury are necessary. 11. Going by the evidence relied on by the trial court as well as the Appellate Court, the stay of the minor at the residence of the accused under their actual control and custody and assault against her, which caused injuries referred above are well established, warranting conviction for the offence punishable under Section 23 of the JJ Act and Section 324 of IPC. In such a case, how the victim reached the house is of no significance, though it is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners as a serious anomaly, since the actual control and custody of the victim by the petitioners stood emphatically proved. In such a case, how the victim reached the house is of no significance, though it is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners as a serious anomaly, since the actual control and custody of the victim by the petitioners stood emphatically proved. Therefore, the concurrent findings of conviction do not require any interference, by exercising limited power of revision available to this Court. Accordingly, the concurrent findings of conviction stand confirmed. 12. Since, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that, the 1st petitioner is in a physically weak stage and the 2nd petitioner also has been suffering from illness, as a matter of leniency, the sentence imposed by the Appellate Court may be reduced to the least minimum possible, I am inclined to consider the said prayer. While considering the prayer for reduction in sentence, it is necessary to refer the sentence provided in the statute and the same is as under: 23. Punishment for cruelty to juvenile or child-.Whoever, having the actual charge of or control over, a juvenile or the child, assaults, abandons, exposes or wilfully neglects the juvenile or causes or procures him to be assaulted, abandoned, exposed or neglected in a manner likely to cause such juvenile or the child unnecessary mental or physical suffering shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or fine, or with both. 324. Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means.—Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 334, voluntarily causes hurt by means of any instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting, or any instrument which, used as a weapon of offence, is likely to cause death, or by means of fire or any heated substance, or by means of any poison or any corrosive substance, or by means of any explosive substance or by means of any substance which it is deleterious to the human body to inhale, to swallow, or to receive into the blood, or by means of any animal, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both. 13. Therefore, the sentence provided for the offence punishable under Section 23 of the JJ Act is, imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or fine or with both. 13. Therefore, the sentence provided for the offence punishable under Section 23 of the JJ Act is, imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or fine or with both. Similarly, the sentence provided for the offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC is imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both. 14. In this matter, the accused were in judicial custody from 07.09.2014 to 01.10.2014 during crime stage. Since, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioners that the 1st petitioner is laid up and one of his legs was amputated and the daily affairs of the 1st petitioner is being looked after by the 2nd petitioner, taking note of the above submission and not as a precedent, I am inclined to modify the sentence as under: i. Both accused are sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of fourteen days for the offence punishable under Section 23 of the JJ Act and also to pay fine of Rs.40,000/-(Rupees Forty Thousand Only) each. In default of payment of fine, within a period of thirty days from today, the accused shall undergo default imprisonment for a period of four months each. ii. Both accused are further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of fourteen days for the offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC. iii. Since, the accused already undergone the substantive sentence imposed by this Court covered by the period 07.09.2014 to 01.10.2014, while they were in custody during crime stage, on deposit of fine ordered by this Court, the trial court is directed to record satisfaction of execution of sentence. On failure to deposit fine within a period of thirty days as directed, the trial court is directed to execute the sentence for default imprisonment, without fail. iv. Fine, if paid or realized, Rs.70,000/-(Rupees Seventy Thousand Only) shall be given to the victim, who was examined as PW1, after securing her presence by issuing notice to her at the earliest, without much delay and report compliance. Rs.10,000/-out of the fine shall go to the state exchequer towards the cost of this proceedings. Accordingly, this revision petition stands allowed in part as indicated above. Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the trial court, within three days, for information and further steps.