SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Mad) 2514

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.N. Prakash, R. Hemalatha, JJ.
G. Mani @ Mani & Others – Petitioner
Versus
State Represented by Inspector of Police, Royakottai Police Station, Krishnagiri – Respondent
Crl.A. Nos. 33 of 2018 & 443 & 357 of 2021 & Crl.M.P. No. 7201 of 2021
Decided On : 29-11-2021

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :R. Sankarasubbu, K. Gandhi Kumar, Advocates.
For the Respondent: M. Babu Muthumeeran, Additional Public Prosecutor.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 374 (2) – Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 341, 323, 506(ii), 392 read with Section 379 IPC and 376 (D) – Offense of rape - Physically assaul - Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act – Information Technology Act, 2000 – Section 67(A) - One, 20 years old, a resident of Village, a college student, along with her lover, a driver by profession, had planned to go to a temple - P.W.1, under guise of going to college, left her residence in college uniform and joined P.W.3 near overbridge, where he was waiting in a Car - They had lunch in a hotel and proceeded towards temple - When the car was passing through, a village enroute, P.W.1 wanted to ease herself and P.W.3 stopped the car by side of road. P.W.1 got down and went to a secluded place, while P.W.3 was waiting in car - Suddenly, four persons, who were later identified as accused surrounded her and physically assaulted her - Whether pace with which legal procedure that followed immediately after crime deserves commendation – Held, In view of video evidence and supporting oral and other documentary evidence, there cannot be an iota of doubt as to involvement of accused in gruesome and ghastly act of rape on P.W.1 and trial court had rightly convicted all four accused and sentenced them as stated - conviction and sentence passed by trial court against A2 was confirmed by Division Bench of Court in Criminal Appeal - In fact, in said appeal, Government was directed to pay a sum as compensation to the victim P.W.1 from the Government exchequer - Court would like to place on record the commendable efforts made by police in taking forward this case to a logical conclusion - Such timely action by the police force helps the society to go a long way in reduction of crimes - Trial court had rightly sentenced accused and inflicted adequate punishment on appellants - Criminal Appeals are dismissed - Connected criminal miscellaneous petition is closed.

JUDGMENT :

R. Hemalatha, J.

(Common Prayer: Criminal Appeals filed under Section 374 (2) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 to set aside the conviction and sentence imposed in S.C. No.30/2015 dated 15.10.2015 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Fact Track Mahila Court, Krishnagiri.)

1. The appellants, C. Prakash (A1), G. Mani (A3) and T. Prakash (A4), challenged the judgment dated 15.10.2015 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Krishnagiri in S.C. No.30 of 2015, in which the three appellants and Subru @ Subramani (A2) were convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 506(ii), 392 read with Section 379 IPC, 376 (D) IPC and under Section 4 of the Tamilnadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act, and sentenced to undergo imprisonment as extracted hereunder :

S. No.

Rank of Accused

Conviction

Sentence

1.

A1 to A4

U/s. 341 IPC

Simple Imprisonment for one month with a fine of Rs.500/- each.

2.

A1 to A4

U/s. 323 IPC (A1 - 2 counts)

Simple Imprisonment for one year with a fine of Rs.500/- and Rs.1,000/- each.

3.

A1 to A4

U/s. 506(ii) IPC

Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years with a fine of Rs.5,000/- each.

4.

A1 to A4

U/s. 392 r/w. Sec. 379 IPC

Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs.5,000/- each.

5.

A1 to A4

376 (D) IPC

Rigorous Imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.5,000/- each.

6.

A1 to A4

U/s. 4 of Tamilnadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act.

Rigorous Imprisonment for two years with a fine of Rs.10,000/- each.

7.

A1

U/s. 354 IPC

Rigorous Imprisonment for two years with a fine of Rs.5,000/-.

8.

A1

U/s. 67(A) of Information Technology Act, 2000.

Rigorous Imprisonment for two years with a fine of Rs.50,000/-

2. Briefly going into the facts of the case, we find that one Nandhini, 20 years old (P.W.1), a resident of Chanthapuram Village, Kaveripattinam, Krishnagiri District, a college student, along with her lover Seralathan (P.W.3), a driver by profession, had planned to go to a temple at Royakottai. On 18.07.2014, P.W.1, under the guise of going to college, left her residence in college uniform and joined P.W.3 near Royakottai overbridge, where he was waiting in a Tata Indica Car, bearing Registration No. TN07 L6696. Thereafter, they had lunch in a hotel and proceeded towards Royakottai. When the car was passing through Podampatti, a village enroute, around 4 p.m., P.W.1 wanted to ease herself and therefore, P.W.3 stopped the car by the side of the road. P.W.1 got down and went to a secluded place, while P.W.3 was waiting in the car. Suddenly, four persons, who were later identified as the accused surrounded her and physically assaulted her. Her personal belongings, including a pair of gold ear studs (M.O.8 and M.O.9), Sonata watch (M.O.10) were forcibly removed from her person. The accused also started stripping her, which made her scream and hearing her cries, P.W.3 rushed to the spot only to be over powered by the accused causing physical injuries to him. He was also tied up to a tree nearby and was forced to look in the opposite direction. What followed was a horrific gang rape, which was also videographed by A1 in his mobile phone (M.O.23). P.W.3 was helpless and was under threat for his life. From the conversation amongst the four, P.W.1 and P.W.3 gathered the names of three of them, Prakash, Mani and Raju. Selvaraj (P.W.4), belonging to Podampatti village, who was returning with his cattle after grazing, accidentally saw the four accused and a nude girl lying on the ground. He also saw P.W.3 tied up to a tree with a saree in the same place. The accused sensing that P.W.4 had seen them, thought that they may be in trouble and two of them went in search of P.W.4. P.W.4, who had reached the main road, was in a position to inform few others who came to the




            Click Here to Read the rest of this document
            1
            2
            3
            4
            5
            6
            7
            8
            9
            10
            11
            SupremeToday Portrait Ad
            supreme today icon
            logo-black

            An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

            Please visit our Training & Support
            Center or Contact Us for assistance

            qr

            Scan Me!

            India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

            For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

            whatsapp-icon Back to top