BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16/02/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN AND THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE R.POORNIMA Crl.A(MD)No.1326 of 2025 and CMP(MD)No.594 of 2026 Kannan : Appellant/A3 Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sivakasi Sub Division, Maraneri Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

(In Crime No.53 of 2010) : 1st Respondent/Complainant

2.Eswari : 2^nd Respondent/De-facto Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 415(2) of BNSS, to call for the entire records pertaining to the judgement delivered by the Special Court for Trial of SC/ST (POA) Act Cases, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur, in Special SC No.19 of 2011, dated 05/08/2025 and to set aside the same and consequently to acquit the appellant/A3.

For Appellant : Mr.K.Suyambulingabharathi For 1st Respondent : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor For 2^nd Respondent : Mr.K.Ramanathan (Legal Aid Counsel)

JUDGMENT

(Judgement of the Court was made by G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN.,J This criminal appeal is directed as against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed in Special SC No.19 of 2011 by the Special Court for Trial of SC/ST (POA) Act cases, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur, thereby convicted the appellant/A3 for the offences under Section 302 IPC r/w 34 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989.

2.The case of the prosecution is that A1 belongs to Christian Paraiyar Community, A2 belongs to Konar Community and A3 belongs to Naickar community. A1 got married to the daughter of A3. While being so, on 10/04/2010 at about 10.00 p.m, with an intention to do away with the life of the deceased due to previous motive with regard to financial transaction with the deceased, the accused joined together and came to the house of the complainant. A1 and A2 knocked the door of the deceased's house. When the same was questioned by them, A1 and A2 had abused them in filthy language by using their caste name and also threatened to eliminate the husband of the complainant. A3 also directed them to break open the door of the house and pull him out and assault him. Thereafter, A1 and A2 broke open the padlock of the door and entered into the house with deadly weapons. A2 pulled the deceased out of the house and A3 directed the other accused to assault him. Thereafter, A1 assaulted the deceased with Aruval on his back side of the neck. Therefore, the deceased fell down and succumbed to the injuries.

3.On the complaint, the respondent Police registered the FIR in Crime No.53 of 2010 for the offences punishable under Section 302 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act. After completing the investigation, a final report was filed and the accused were charged punishable under Sections 323, 302 r/w 34 IPC and Section 3(1)(x), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989. The Trial Court had taken cognizance of the case and framed charges against under Sections 302 r/w 34 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 and 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 against A2 and framed charges under Sections 323, 302 r/w 34 IPC and Section 3(2)(v), 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (POA) Act against A3. The first accused did not appear before the Trial Court and as such, the Trial Court had split up the case against A2 and A3 and conducted separate trial.

4.Before the Trial Court, on the side of the prosecution, 19 witnesses were examined as PW1 to PW19 and marked 22 documents as Exs.P1 to P22. The prosecution had also produced material objects MO1 to MO5. On the side of the accused, no one was examined and no document was produced.

5.On perusal of the oral and documentary evidence, the Trial Court found A2 and A3 guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 302 r/w 34 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 and sentenced them to undergo Life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each and in default, to undergo one month simple imprisonment. Against which, the present appeal has been preferred by A