Back
MADRAS HIGH COURT
A. N. R., J
In re. Kulandaivelu v.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details surrounding the arrest and escape incident. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. defendant's argument regarding intention in escape. (Para 3) |
| 3. legal interpretation of escape in ipc. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 4. court's determination on the existing law and its application. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 12) |
| 5. final ruling and adjustment of sentence. (Para 13 , 14) |
1. The revision petitioner is accused 6 in S. C. No. 72 of 1966 on the file of the IIIrd Assistant Sessions Judge.Tiruchirapalli. He was originally charged along with several other accused under S.147, S.148, S.224, S.225, I.P. Code etc. etc. and tried by the IIIrd Assistant Sessions Judge. Accused 5 and 7 and the petitioner alone were convicted and the rest were acquitted. The petitioner was convicted under S.224 and S.323, IPC. and sentenced to under R.I. for one year and three months respectively by the Assistant Sessions Judge. On appeal, accused 5 and 7 were acquitted of all the charges and the petitioner was also acquitted under S.323, IPC. but his conviction and sentence under S.224, IPC. were confirmed.
2. The relevant facts for the purpose of appreciating the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner are these :
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
