Advocates:
['M/S R NALLIYAPPAN', '', 'T MEGANATHAN', 'PUBLIC PROSECUTOR', '', 'CITATION FILED', 'CITATIONS FILED']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 11.02.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

Crl.RC.No.513 of 2014

Rajendran

S/o. Veeran

... Petitioner/Accused

Vs

The State represented by the Inspector of Police

Transport and Investigation Wing

Salem City

(Crime No.84 of 2012)

... Respondent/Complainant

Prayer: This Criminal Revision Case filed, under Section 397 r/w

Section 401 Cr.PC, to set aside the Judgment dated 26.09.2013

in C.A.No.58 of 2013 on the file of the learned III Additional

District and Sessions Judge, Salem, modifying the fine amount

imposed in the Judgment dated 23.05.2013 in S.T.C.No.382 of 2012

on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Salem and

to allow the above Criminal Revision.

For Petitioner

: Mr.R.Nalliyappan

For Respondent

: Mr.T.Shunmugarajeswaran,

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the

Petitioner/Accused, seeking to set aside the Judgment dated

26.09.2013 in C.A.No.58 of 2013 on the file of the learned III

Additional District and Sessions Judge, Salem, modifying the

fine amount imposed in the Judgment dated 23.05.2013 in

S.T.C.No.382 of 2012 on the file of the learned Judicial

Magistrate No.III, Salem and to allow the Criminal Revision Case.

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 05.02.2012 at

about 13.30 hours at Salem City, four roads to New bus stand

Main Road in the Periyar Over bridge within the limit of

Hasthampatti Police Station, when the defacto complainant along

with his two sons was riding his two wheeler Hero Honda

Pleasure, vehicle bearing Registration No.TN.30D1687, the

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

accused / petitioner who had driven his Innova car bearing

Registration No.TN.30G0313 by overtaking the another vehicle had

come in a rash and negligent manner and hit against the two

wheeler driven by the defacto complainant, due to the impact,

the defacto complainant and his two sons fell down and sustained

injuries.

3.On the complaint given by P.W.1 / defacto complainant,

the respondent police registered a case in Crime No.84 of 2012

for the offences under Section 279, 337(2) and 338 IPC against

the Revision Petitioner / accused. After completion of

investigation, final report was filed. On receipt of the Final

Report along with the relevant documents, the case was taken

cognizance in S.T.C.No.382 of 2012, on the file of the learned

Judicial Magistrate No.III, Salem and summons were issued to

the accused / Revision Petitioner.

4.On appearance of the Petitioner/Accused, he was furnished

copies of the relevant documents and the final report under

Section 207 Cr.P.C. When the petitioner / accused was

questioned about the charge, he denied the same and pleaded not

guilty.

5.After giving sufficient time and upon considering the

police report and documents sent along with it under Section 173

Cr.P.C., the Trial Court finding that these grounds for

presuming that the accused / petitioner had committed the

offence questioned the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty

and claimed to be tried.

6.During the trial, the prosecution in order to prove the

guilt of the Petitioner/Accused, had examined P.W1 to PW8 on its

side and marked documents Ex.P1 to Ex.P10. No material object

was produced. On the side of the defence, no oral or

documentary evidence were adduced. The Trial Court found the

Petitioner/Accused not guilty for the offence under Section 279

of IPC and acquitted the accused as per Section 255(1) Cr.P.C.,

whereas found that the accused / petitioner guilty for the

offences under Section 337 (2 counts) IPC and convicted and

imposed a fine of Rs.300/- for each count and found the

accused / petitioner guilty for offence under Section 338 IPC

and imposed