AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ramaswami, J.—It was argued by the learned counsel Mr. Ramachandran that when the revision petitioner threatened to kill the Revenue
Inspector for lawfully distraining his properties, that would not amount to the offence of assault, for which he has been convicted u/s 353 I. P. C. I
agree. If the words had been accompanied by any gesture -- but unfortunately regarding which there is no evidence -- that would certainly amount
to assault. In this case, however, the offence would clearly fall u/s 503 I. P. C. namely, the offence of criminal intimidation. The illustration given in
this section is appropriate to this case. ""A, for the purpose of inducing B to desist from prosecuting a civil suit, threatens to burn B''s house. A is
guilty Of criminal intimidation."" The revision petitioner for the purpose of inducing the revenue inspector to desist from distraining his properties,
threatened to kill the revenue inspector, arid therefore he is guilty of criminal intimidation. The conviction is altered from Section 353I. P. C. to
Section 503 I. P. C. The sentence is maintained. The revision petition is dismissed.