BAIL SLIP

The 2^nd

Appellant/2^nd

Accused namely John Britto,

S/o.Jesudoss was directed to be released on bail vide order

dated

12.09.2019

made

in

Crl.M.P.No.12345/2019

in

Crl.A.No.411/2019 on the file of this court.

The 1^st Appellant/1^st Accused namely Madhalaimuthu @ Raja,

S/o.John Britto was directed to be released on bail as per

order of this court dated 21.01.2020 made in Crl.M.P.No.317/2020

in Crl.A.No.411/2019.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

RESERVED ON : 20.1.2022

DELIVERED ON : 15.2.2022.

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

Criminal Appeal No.411 of 2019

1. Madhalaimuthu @ Raja

2. Jhon Britto

...Appellants/Accused

vs.

State re. by

The Inspector of Police,

Thammampatti Police Station,

Thammampatti,

Salem District.

...Respondent/Complainant

Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 Cr.P.C. against the

judgment of conviction and sentence passed in S.C.No.120 of 2016

dated 19.6.2019 by the Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram,

Salem.

For Appellants : Mr.T.Muruganantham

For Respondent : Mr.S.Sugendran,

Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

JUDGMENT

Challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence rendered

by the Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram in S.C.No.120 of

2016, the accused being son and father have filed the present

Criminal Appeal.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2.Allegations levelled against the appellants are that A1,

son of A2, by giving false promise to marry, had forcible sexual

intercourse with PW1, the de facto complainant several times,

resultantly, she had delivered a child, which died few days

later and when the de facto complainant had demanded A1 to marry

her, he had refused to marry her and thereupon, when she had

complained the same to his father, A2, he had given false hope

that after marriage of his daughter, he would conduct the

marriage of PW1 with his son, A1, however, on a later date, on

coming to know that a marriage proposal for A1 with another girl

was going on, she alongwith her parents and sister had

approached the accused demanding justice for her and by that

time, they had abused her with filthy language and threatened

her with dire consequences and thereby the appellants stand

charged as under:-

Rank

Charges

A1

Sections 376, 417, 420 read with Section 34, Sections

294(B), 506(ii) IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu

Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998

A2

Section 420 read with Section 34, Sections 294(B), 506

(ii) IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of

Harassment of Women Act, 1998

3. However, the appellants stand convicted and sentenced as

under:-

Rank

Provision of

conviction

Sentence

A1

417, 420 r/w 34 IPC

i) One year Rigorous Imprisonment

and to pay fine of Rs.2000/- in

default to undergo three months

Simple Imprisonment

ii)

Four

years

Rigorous

Imprisonment and to pay fine of

Rs.50,000/- in default to undergo

six months Simple Imprisonment

A2

420 r/w 34 IPC

Four years Rigorous Imprisonment

and to pay fine of Rs.50,000/- in

default to undergo six months

Simple Imprisonment

4. Brief facts of the case, as evinced from the prosecution

witnesses and other materials available on record, are as under:-

(i)PW1, the de facto complainant belongs to Vadakku Kaattu

Kottai, Koneripatty, Gengavalli, Taluk, Salem District. PW2 and

PW3 are her parents and they are doing agriculture. She has got

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

four brothers and two sisters. She had studied upto Higher

Secondary education in Thammampatti Girls Higher Secondary

School and employed as Tailor. From the year 2008, she had been

in love with A1, son of A2, who resides in a house behind her

house. She had go go to her field only through the field of the

accused.

(ii)While PW1 used to go to her field, A1 used to tease her

and later on, he had pulled her into his hou