The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the appellant's acquittal due to inconsistencies in witness testimonies.

ORDER

This Criminal Revision has been preferred against the judgment dated 18.07.2022, passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Vellore District, in C.A.No.17 of 2019, confirming the conviction and sentence imposed on the petitioner dated 05.02.2019 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vellore District, in S.C.No.62 of 2015, for the offences punishable under Section s 342 & 397 (2 counts) of IPC .

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 12.01.2014 at about 8.40 p.m., at Vakukkumedu to Elavampadi road, near Anpoondi Aerodrome ground, while the witness P.W.2 viz., Durairaj was proceeding in his two wheeler, he received a phone call and therefore, he stopped his two wheeler and was talking in his phone. At that time, the accused came there with intention to rob him. They wrongfully confined him at knife point and robbed his cell phone and ATM card. They also caused hurt on his left finger and left face. When P.W.2 shouted for help, the accused threatened him with dire consequence. The third accused viz., the petitioner herein caused hurt by stabbing him with penknife. At that juncture, another victim P.W.1 came to the scene of occurrence in four wheeler and he was also wrongly confined by the accused persons and they robbed him as well. On the complaint, the respondent registered the FIR in Crime No.29 of 2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b) & 397 of IPC . After completion of investigation, the respondent filed final report and the same has been taken cognizance by the trial Court in S.C.No.62 of 2015 for the offences punishable under Sections

294(b), 342, 397 (2 counts) r/w 34 of IPC .

3. On the side of the prosecution, they examined P.W.1 to P.W.17 and marked documents in Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.17. The prosecution had also produced material objects in M.O.1 to M.O.11. On the side of the accused, no one was examined and no documents were marked before the trial Court. On perusal of the oral and documentary evidences, the trial Court found all the accused guilty for the offences punishable under Section s 342 , 294(b), 397 r/w. 34 of IPC , and sentenced them to undergo six months simple imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 294(b) & 342 of , and also sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment for the offene punishable under Section 397 (2 counts) r/w 34 of . Aggrieved by the same, the accused preferred an appeal and the appellate Court acquitted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 294(b) of and confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed on them for the offences under Sections

342 & 397(2 counts) of IPC . Hence, the petitioner filed the present revision petition.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that both the victims were examined as P.W.1 and P.W.2. However, they did not support the case of the prosecution as against the petitioner. There is absolutely no specific overt act as against the petitioner. Even according to the case of the prosecution, the alleged occurrence was taken place on 12.01.2014. The petitioner had surrendered before the trial Court on 10.10.2014. However, he was shown arrest only on 04.11.2014 and thereafter he was taken for police custody and his confessions statement was recorded on 04.11.2014. On the strength of the confession statement, the respondent had recovered M.O.1.

4.1. He further submitted that even according to the case of the prosecution, the second accused alone stabbed P.W.1 & P.W.2. There was absolutely no overt act as against the petitioner. Since the petitioner was