COMMON JUDGMENT

The Appellants have preferred these Criminal Appeals as against the judgment dated 5.10.2018 made in S.C.No.47 of 2018 passed by the learned

Principal District and Session Judge, Tiruppur.

2. The brief facts, which are necessary for disposal of these Criminal

Appeals, are as follows:-

2.1. The De-facto Complainant in this case is the Prosecution

Witness P.W-1 Manikandan. As per the case of the Prosecution, the De- facto Complainant/P.W-1 in this case Manikandan is working as a Chef in Kumar Bakery which is situated behind the Old Bus Stand, Tiruppur. On 20.01.2018 by around 11.00 a.m. the De-facto Complainant/P.W-1 in this case Manikandan was proceeding on Arisikadai Street in Tiruppur Town for purchase of provisions to Kumar Bakery, he was walking on Sharmiam

Sahib Street holding his mobile phone Vivo Blue Colour in his hand, at that time, the second Accused in this case Karthikeyan riding two-wheeler (Bajaj Pulsar) bearing Registration No.TN-42-P-3733 and the first Accused Jana @ Janakaraj was riding pillion. They were coming from opposite direction and approached towards the De-facto Complainant/P.W-1. The De-facto Complainant Manikandan was walking on Sharmiam Sahib Street and proceeded towards provision shop for purchase of provisions for use of Kumar Bakery. While walking he was talking on his mobile phone. The two wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-42-P-3733 (Bajaj Pulsar) came rushing towards him and the rider as well as the pillion rider threatened him and snatched the mobile phone from his hand. Also, the pillion rider/A-1 Jana @ Janakaraj placed knife on his neck and threatened him stating that whatever money he has he should hand over to them. Rs.300/- which he had kept in the shirt pocket for purchase of provisions was snatched by him. He immediately made hue and cry for which the passers-by came to the rescue of the De-facto Complainant. At that time, A-1 and A-2 sped away on the crowded street. They threatened the passers-by wielding a knife. Therefore, the De-facto Complainant preferred a complaint under Ex.P-1 with the Tiruppur South Police Station. P.W-6 Sub Inspector of Police, Tiruppur South Police Station received the complaint from the De-facto

Complainant and registered the FIR under Ex.P-7. He had sent the original complaint under Ex.P-1 and original FIR Ex.P-7 to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tiruppur and copies of the same to the higher officials. P.W-7 the Inspector of Police, Tiruppur South Police Station took up the investigation, proceeded to the scene of crime and prepared observation mahazar under Ex.P-4 in the presence of witnesses. P.W-4 and P.W-5 Mahalingam and Thirumurugan and he also prepared a rough sketch under Ex.P-8 and had arrested the Accused and recorded confession statement from the Accused under Ex.P-5 in the presence of witnesses P.W-3 and P.W-4 and filed final report of the investigation before the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tiruppur. Since the offences were triable by Court of Sessions, the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tiruppur had taken the final report on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tiruppur, as Preliminary Registration Case and issued summons to the Accused. On appearance of the Accused, copies were furnished under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. and the case was committed to the learned Principal

District Judge, Tiruppur.

2.2. On receipt of the case records from the Court of the learned

Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tiruppur in PRC No.7 of 2018, the learned

Sessions Judge had taken on file the case as S.C.No.47 of 2018. After hearing the arguments of the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Counsel for the Accused, the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruppur, framed charges under Section 392 r/w. 397 of IPC against the Accused Nos.1 and 2 and also under Section 506(ii) as against Accused

Nos.1 and 2.

2.3. Since the Accused Nos.1 and 2 denied the charges and claimed to be tried, the learned Principal Dis