Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
R. PONGIAPPAN, J.
Silva & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State, rep. by Inspector of Police, Thaddarmadam Police Station, Thoothukudi - Respondent
Crl. A. (MD) No. 19 of 2016
Decided On : 23-08-2021
Conviction - Criminal Appeal - IPC, TNPPDL Act - 148, 147, 452, 294(b), 324 r/w 149, 506(ii), Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, Section 3(i) of Tamil Nadu Public Property Damages and Loss Act
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted for various offences including unlawful entry, assault, and property damage. The victims, including the defacto complainant, testified to the accused unlawfully entering the house, abusing them, and causing injuries. The police officers and doctors provided evidence of the injuries sustained and the investigation process.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the accused guilty of certain charges, but acquitted the remaining accused due to doubts about their involvement. The court also noted discrepancies in the charges and evidence, leading to the acquittal of some accused and the modification of charges for others.
Issues: The issues revolved around the sufficiency of evidence, discrepancies in the charges, and the nature of the weapons used by the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found discrepancies in the charges and evidence, leading to the acquittal of some accused and the modification of charges for others. The court also emphasized the need for clear and unambiguous charges to provide the accused with a precise notice of the accusations.
Final Decision: The Criminal Appeal was partly allowed, with the remaining accused acquitted and the convicted accused being sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment and pay fines.
JUDGMENT :
The present criminal appeal is directed against the conviction and sentence, dated 16.12.2015, made in S.C.No.319 of 2015, on the file of the Sessions Court, Mahalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Thoothukudi.
2. The appellants are arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 8 in the above referred case. They stood charged for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 147, 452, 294(b), 324 r/w 149 and 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act and Section 3(i) of Tamil Nadu Public Property Damages and Loss Act. All the accused denied the charges as false and opted for trial. Therefore, they were put on trial on the charges.
3. After full-fledged trial, the learned Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Thoothukudi, came to the conclusion that the appellants were found guilty for the following offences and accordingly, they were convicted and sentenced as follows:-
| Accused | Section | Sentence |
| A-1 to A5 | 148 IPC | Convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. |
| A-6 to A8 | 147 IPC | Convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. |
| A1 to A8 | 452 IPC | Convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month. |
| A1 | 324 (2 counts) IPC | Convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years for each count and directed to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- for each count, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months (the sentences are run concurrently) |
| A3 | 324 IPC | Convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. |
| A2, A4 & A5 | 324 r/w 149 IPC | Convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. |
Challenging the said conviction and sentence, all the accused are before this Court, by way of filing the present Criminal Appeal.
4. The relevant facts of the case, which gave rise to filing of this appeal are necessary to be recapitulated for the disposal of this appeal:-
(i) P.W.1-Muthukani is residing in Vedhakovil Street, Thattarmadam. She is working as Assistant in Noon Meal Centre. Being the reason both the accused and P.W.1 were residing in the same Village, P.W.1 known to the accused. During the relevant point of time, her son Suresh Jacob was working as a driver in Call Taxi, Tambaram at Chennai. During that time, he developed love affair with one Muthusaral and performed the marriage and the same has been registered. On 24.05.2014, at about 09.00 a.m., on coming to know that the said Muthusaral was in the house of P.W.1, all the accused with an intention to commit an offence, came there and criminally trespassed into the house of P.W.1 with deadly weapons. After entering into the house of P.W.1, all the accused scolded P.W.1 with filthy language, while so, the first accused Silva attacked P.W.1 with Wooden log (Other Language) in her right hand. Further, the third accused Rajamani attacked her with Wooden log (Other Language) in the left thigh, during that time, the fourth accused Thennarasan gave beatings to P.W.3 Prema, who is the sister of P.W.1, accused Nos.2 & 5 gave beatings to P.W.2 Suresh Jacob. At the same time, the accused Nos.6,7 & 8 scolded them in filthy language and the accused Nos.1 & 3 damaged the Samsung Television, which kept in the occurrence house. In the course of same transaction the accused Nos.2, 4 & 5 damaged the bike, which has been parked in the house of P.W.1. Ultimately, after the said occurrence, on
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
