Vijayakumar vs State - 2019 Supreme(Mad) 3094

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2019 Supreme(Mad) 3094

B.PUGALENDHI
Vijayakumar – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :T. Senthilkumar, Advocate
For the Respondent:S. Bharathi, Government Advocate

JUDGMENT :

B. Pugalendhi, J.

1. This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner/accused, as against the order dated 05.03.2012, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, Tuticorin, in C.A. No. 3 of 2012, modifying the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sathankulam, in C.C. No. 195 of 2010, dated 05.12.2011.

2. The petitioner/accused was tried for the offence under Sections 452, 323 IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sathankulam, in C.C. No. 195 of 2010 and the learned Magistrate, vide order dated 05.12.2011, found the petitioner/accused guilty, convicted and sentenced him as follows:

Section of Law	Period of Imprisonment
452 IPC	To undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, i/d to undergo simple imprisonment for one month.
323 IPC	To pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, i/d to undergo simple imprisonment for one month.
4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act	To undergo si

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2019 Supreme(Mad) 3094

B.PUGALENDHIVijayakumar – AppellantVersusState – Respondent

B.PUGALENDHI
Vijayakumar – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent