Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 64993
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D.Bharatha Chakravarthy, J
Senthilkumar @ Senthil – Appellant
Versus
State by:The Inspector of Police, Neyveli Town Police Station, Cuddalore District. – Respondent
Crl.R.C.Nos.1925 to 1929, 1936, 1939, 1941, 1942 & 1944 of 2023
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.A.Arasu Ganeshan
For the Respondents:Mr.J.Subbiah Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
The court upheld convictions for theft while reducing sentences based on the time served, balancing accountability with rehabilitative justice principles.
Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 397 and 401 - Criminal Revision Petitions filed to challenge convictions for chain snatching incidents - The court assessed the evidence and upheld the convictions while modifying the sentences based on the time served by the accused. (Paras 5-9)
(B) Criminal Appeals - The court noted that significant evidence supported charges, and the defense's claims of fabrication were unsubstantiated - The accused’s reformative behavior post-incarceration was considered in reducing sentence. (Paras 6 and 8)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner faced multiple charges of theft related to chain snatching incidents occurring in 2006 and 2007, with convictions upheld from the lower courts confirming sentences ranging around two years of imprisonment and fines.
Findings of Court:
The modification of the sentence was granted based on the lengthy time served and the accused’s conduct during imprisonment and post-release, affirming the convictions.
Issues: The main issues involved the validity and extent of the sentences in light of the defense's assertion of wrongful accusations and the assessment of the evidence presented by the police.
Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed the principle that the evidence supported the convictions, while also balancing rehabilitative justice principles in altering the sentences.
Result: The Criminal Revision Petitions are partly allowed, with sentences modified to reflect time already served.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the criminal revision cases. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. defense arguments and evidence considerations. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. petitioner's circumstances and sentence considerations. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. modification of sentence in light of prior conduct. (Para 9) |
COMMON ORDER
All the Criminal Revision Petitions are filed to set aside the order passed in Crl.A.Nos. 26, 23, 25, 29, 24, 21, 22, 20, 28, and 27 of 2019 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Cuddalore, dated 22.10.2019, which confirmed the judgment made in C.C.Nos. 436, 433, 435, 439, 434, 431, 432, 429, 438, and 437 of 2008, respectively, on the file of Judicial Magistrate No.1, Panruti, dated 20.12.2018.
2. These ten Criminal Revision Petitions are filed by the same petitioner, and the allegations are similar in nature, namely theft. The respondent/police is also the same, and thus they have been taken up and disposed of by this common order.
3. Broadly, the allegations in these cases relate to chain snatching incidents, all registered in June 2007, except for the case in Crl.R.C.1926 of 2023, which was registered in December 2006. In that case, the allegation is that two persons came on a two-wheeler and snatched the victim's chain. The jewels, either in full or part, are said to have been recovered from the petitioner.
4. The necessary details in respect of each of the cases is given hereunder:-
Crl.R.C.No.1925 of 2023
1. Incident – 03.06.2007, 19.00 Hrs.
2. Complaint – 04.06.2007, 15.00 Hrs.
3. FIR- 271/2007, u/s 379 IPC against unknown
4. FIR contents – two persons came in two wheeler, stopped 10 ft nearby P.W.1 and acted as repairing two wheeler, when she cross them one of the person snatched 1 ½ sovereign of gold chain from P.W.1, D.Janaki and flew away.
5. Arrest - 08.06.2007, Morning 05.00 A.M. A1 – Vasantharaja @Prabu A2 – Senthilkumar @ Senthil
6. Charge Sheet – C.C.No.253/2007 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli. Thereafter transferred to Judicial Magistrate No.1, Panruti in C.C.No.436/2008.
7. Witnesses - P.W.1, D.Janaki, defacto complainant P.W.2, Mani, son of P.W.1 P.W.3, Venkatesan, observation Mahazar Witness P.W.4, Ravi, witness for confession Statement P.W.5, Natarajan, SI of Police, Crime who registered FIR P.W.6, Kalitheerthan, Inspector of police, filed charge sheet.
8. Judgment - C.C.No.436/2008 dated 20.12.2018 Simple Imprisonment for 2 years, fine Rs.1,500/-, Fine amount paid.
9. Appeal- Crl.A.No.26/2019, confirmed on 22.10.2019
Crl.R.C.No. 1926 of 2023
1. Incident – 06.12.2006, 19.30 Hrs.
2. Complaint – 07.12.2006, 10.00 Hrs.
3. FIR - 556/2006, u/s 379 IPC against unknown
4. FIR contents – two persons came in two wheeler and snatched 5 sovereign of gold chain from P.W.2, Devagi
5. Arrest - 08.06.2007, Morning 05.00 A.M. A1 – Vasantharaja @Prabu A2 – Senthilkumar @ Senthil
6. Charge Sheet – C.C.No.227/2007 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli. Thereafter transferred to Judicial Magistrate No.1, Panruti in C.C.No.433/2008.
7. Witnesses - P.W.1, Sundaramurthy, defacto complainant
P.W.2, Devagi, wife of defacto complainant
P.W.3, Ravikumar, observation Mahazar Witness
P.W.4, Srinivasan, witness for confession Statement
P.W.5, Palanivel, SI of Police, who registered FIR
P.W.6, Kalitheerthan, Inspector of police, filed charge sheet.
8. Judgment - C.C.No.433/2008 dated 20.12.2018 Simple Imprisonment for 2 years, fine Rs.1,500/-, Fine amount paid.
9. Appeal - Crl.A.No.23/2019, confirmed on 22.10.2019
Crl.R.C.No. 1927 of 2023
1. Incident– 02.06.2007, 19.00 Hrs.
2. Complaint – 04.06.2007, 18.15 Hrs.
3. FIR - 272/2007, u/s 379 IPC against unknown
4. FIR contents – two persons came in two wheeler and, stopped vehicle, one of them alighted from two wheeler and acted for passing urine suddenly he pushed defacto complainant and snatched 4 sovereign of gold chain from P.W.1, Dhanalakshmi
5. Arrest - 08.06.2007, Morning 05.00 A.M.
A1 – Vasantharaja @Prabu A2 – Senthilkumar @ Senthil
6. Charge
