Back
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J
Radhakrishnan – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of accident and conviction (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments concerning evidence and witness credibility (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court observations on evidence presented (Para 6) |
| 4. prosecution's failure to prove identity beyond reasonable doubt (Para 7) |
| 5. final ruling and acquittal of the appellant (Para 8 , 9) |
O R D E R
This petition has been filed to set aside the Judgment pronounced by the Sessions Judge, Tiruvannamalai made in C.A.No.3 of 2015 dated 30-11-2015, confirming the Judgment pronounced by the Judicial Magistrate, Arni made in C.C.No.177 of 2008 dated 06.01.2015 by allowing the Revision.
2. The petitioner/accused was convicted by the Judicial Magistrate, Arni by Judgment dated 06.01.2015 for the offence under Sections 279 & 304(A) of IPC and sentenced him to six months Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- with a default sentence of one month Rigorous Imprisonment. Aggrieved against the same, he has preferred an appeal to the Sessions Judge, Tiruvannamalai in Crl.A.No.3 of 2015. The Sessions Judge, by Judgment dated 30.11.2015 had dismissed the appeal, confirming the conviction and sentence.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 06.01.2008, at ab
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
