Back
2013 Supreme(Mad) 3565
High Court of Judicature at Madras
M. VENUGOPAL, J.
Thiyagu @ Thiyagarajan
Versus
State, rep. by The Inspector of Police
Crl.A. No. 24 of 2006
Decided On : 08-10-2013
For the Appellant:P.M. Duraiswamy, Advocate.
For the Respondent: P. Govindarajan, APP.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on witness identification and physical evidence to establish guilt for robbery under the Indian Penal Code.
Headnote:
Robbery - Indian Penal Code - Section 392, Section 397
Fact of the Case:
The Appellant/A.1 was convicted for robbery under Section 392 r/w. Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleged that the Appellant/A.1, along with two other accused, committed robbery on a bus, threatening the driver and conductor with a sickle, and robbing a cash bag containing Rs.3,058.50. The trial court found the Appellant/A.1 guilty and sentenced him to seven years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the Appellant/A.1 guilty of robbery under Section 392 r/w. Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code based on the testimony of the conductor and driver of the bus, who identified the Appellant/A.1 and described the robbery. The court also noted the seizure of the sickle and the cash bag from the Appellant/A.1 as evidence supporting the prosecution's case.
Issues: The main issues were the identification of the Appellant/A.1 as the perpetrator of the robbery and the reliability of the evidence provided by the conductor and driver of the bus.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the identification and testimony of the conductor and driver of the bus, as well as the seizure of the sickle and cash bag from the Appellant/A.1, to establish his guilt for robbery under Section 392 r/w. Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code.
Final Decision: The court confirmed the conviction and sentence of the Appellant/A.1 for robbery under Section 392 r/w. Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code.
1. The Appellant/A.1 has preferred the instant Criminal Appeal as against the conviction and sentence dated 30/11/2005 in S.C.No.174 of 2005 passed by the Learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.III, Coimbatore.
2. It comes to be known that the Appellant/A.1 viz., Thiyagu @ Thiyagarajan and the Second Accused Karu @ Nagarajan were apprehended while the Third Accused Vellian @ Jabarulla was absconding and as such the trial Court in its Common Judgment in S.C.No.174 of 2005 and S.C.No.219 of 2005 dated 30/11/2005 had stated that the Original P.R.C was committed earlier (viz., P.R.C.No.26 of 2004) and later, P.R.C.No.19 of 2005 was committed at a later stage.
3. The trial Court while delivering the Common Judgment in S.C.No.174 of 2005 and S.C.No.219 of 2005 (committed on 28/4/2005 and on 7/7/2005 in P.R.C.No.26 of 2004 and 19 of 2015) found the Appellant/First Accused (in Crl.a.No.24 of 2006) guilty and in respect of an offence under Section 392 r/w. Section 397 of Indian Penal Code and was awarded with the punishment of seven years Rigorous Imprisonment and was also directed to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, he was directed to undergo default sentence of four months simple imprisonment.
4. The trial Court acquitted the Second Accused (in S.C.No.194 of 2005) and Third Accused (in S.C.No.219 of 2005) in respect of the charge for offence under Section 392 r/w. 397 IPC.
5. The case of the prosecution is that the Appellant/First Accused along with Second and Third Accused, on 6/5/2004, at about 21.50 hours at Driver's Bus stop, Sundapalayam Road, Coimbatore City, joined together with a common intention to commit robbery, stopping the Town Bus Route No.58. The Appellant/A.1, boarded the bus from back side and ordered the bus driver to stop the bus and broke left side top fixed glasses into pieces and torn the rubber beeding at the middle, cut the Bell Rope at the rear with an sickle and at the point of Aruval, threatened the Driver Murugesan (P.W.2) to stop the Bus and made an attempt to assault the Conductor/Anbarasu (P.W.1) and robbed away the Cash Bag containing cash of Rs.3,058.50 and thereby, the Appellant/A.1 and the Second and Third Accused, committed the offences punishable under Section 392 r/w. 397 IPC and that the Respondent/Inspector of Police, B.2 R.S.Puram (Crime) Police Station, Coimbatore, after completing the investigation, laid the charge sheet.
6. On the basis of the acquisition levelled against the Appellant/A.1 and the Second and Third Accused, the trial Court framed necessary charges for the offence under Section 392 r/w. 397 IPC and the same was read over and explained to them. However, the Appellant/First Accused and the Second and Third Accused, denied the charges framed against them and claimed to be tried.
7. Before the Trial Court, on the side of the Prosecution Witnesses, P.Ws.1 to 12 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.10 were marked. Also, M.Os.1 to 3 were marked on the side of the Respondent/Prosecution.
8. When the Appellant/Accused, Second and Third Accused were questioned under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., in regard to the incriminating circumstances appearing in evidence against them, they denied their complicity in the crime.
9. The Trial Court, on an analysis of both oral and documentary evidence and resultantly found the Appellant/A.1 guilty under Section 392 r/w. 397 IPC and sentenced him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 7 years and also imposed a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default of payment of fine further directed him to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of four months. However, the Trial Court, acquitted the Second and Third Accused.
10. Being dissatisfied with the Conviction and Sentence passed by the trial Court in S.C.No.174 of 2005 dated 30/11/2005 on the file of the Learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.3), Coimbatore, as an aggrieved person, the Appellant/First Accused has projected
