Sivakumar vs State by The Inspector of Police

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2015 Supreme(Mad) 2585

P.DEVADASS
Sivakumar – Appellant
Versus
State by The Inspector of Police – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For Appellant : Mr.R.C. Paul Kanagaraj for Mr.S.V.D.Rajendra Prasad & Mr.C.P.Naresh Kumar
For Respondent: Mr.P.Govindarajan, Additional Public Prosecutor.

JUDGMENT :

The sole accused in the sessions case in S.C.No.371 of 2012 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Chennai is the appellant.

2 He has been tried for charges under section 376, 506(i), 354 I.P.C. and Sec.4 of Tamilnadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998.

3. Upon appreciating the evidence, the trial Court found him not guilty under section 506(i) of I.P.C., however, found him guilty on the other charges and sentenced him as detailed below:

Conviction	Sentence
(i) 376 I.P.C.	10 years R.I. and fine Rs.10,000/- i/d 3 months R.I.
(ii) 356 I.P.C.	3 years R.I. and fine Rs.5,000/- i/d 6 months S.I.
(iii) Sec.4 of T.N.Prohibition of	3 years R.I. And fine Rs.10,000/- i/d 6 months S.I.
Women Harassment Act, 1998

4. The prosecution case runs as under:

(1) The accused and P.W.2 are spouses. Their daughters are P.Ws.1 and 4. P.W.7's daughters are P.Ws.2 and 4 and sons are P.Ws.3 and 14. P.W.5's son is P.W.6.

(2) The accused was running a Sports shop in Chennai. He lived along with his wife and chi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2015 Supreme(Mad) 2585

P.DEVADASSSivakumar – AppellantVersusState by The Inspector of Police – Respondent

Cases Referred (8)

P.DEVADASS
Sivakumar – Appellant
Versus
State by The Inspector of Police – Respondent