Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dr. R.N.MANJULA, J
1.N.Kathirvel – Appellant
Versus
State represented by The Inspector of Police, Kenikarai Police Station, Ramanathapuram District. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accused charged with robbery and dacoity based on eyewitness accounts. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. court assessed inconsistencies in testimony and evidence collection. (Para 5 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. conviction criteria emphasize direct evidence; benefit of the doubt applied. (Para 9 , 18 , 22 , 29) |
| 4. final determination based on evidentiary standards resulting in partial allowance. (Para 30 , 31) |
COMMON JUDGMENT
Crl.A(MD)No.40 of 2018 has been filed by A2 to A4, Crl.A(MD)No.41 of 2018 has been filed by A6 and Crl.A(MD)No.292 of 2018 has been filed by A1 challenging the judgment of the learned Additional District and Sessions Court, Ramanathapuram, dated 11.01.2018 in S.C.No.94 of 2017.
2. The accused have been charged for the offences and found guilty and convicted and sentenced to undergo the punishment as under:
| Rank of accused | Charges u/s | Conviction | Punishment |
| A1 | 395 IPC | 395 IPC | 5 years(R.I), fine Rs.1000/- i/d 3 months (S.I) |
| A2 - A4 | 450, 395 r/w 397 IPC | 450, 395 r/w 397 IPC | For 450 IPC: 1 year(R.I) each, fine Rs.500/- each i/d 1 month (S.I) For 395 r/w397 IPC: (R.I)each, 7 years fine Rs.2000/- each i/d 6 months (S.I) |
| A6 | 395 IPC | 395 IPC | 4 years(R.I), fine of Rs.1000/-i/d 3 months (S.I) |
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
