Crl.A.(MD)No.356 of 2017

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Dated : 25.09.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

Crl. A.(MD)No.356 of 2017

Chinnamal

.. Appellant

Vs.

1.State rep. by the

Inspector of Police,

Ponnamaravathi Police Station,

Pudukkottai District.

(Crime No.202 of 2013).

2.Thangaraj

3.Chelladurai @ Karthikeyan

.. Respondent

Prayer : This Criminal Appeal is filed under Sections 374 of Cr.P.C., to set aside the

judgment made in S.C.No.132 of 2014 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge,

Mahalir Neethimandram, Pudukottai, Pudukottai District and set aside the judgment

dated 20.06.2017 and punish the respondents 2 and 3/accused no.1 and 2 in

accordance with law.

For Appellant

: Mr.N.Subramani

For 1^st Respondent : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar

Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

For Respondents 2 and 3: Mr.N.A.Palaniyandi

JUDGMENT

This appeal has been filed by the appellant to to set aside the judgment and

1 / 18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD)No.356 of 2017

conviction passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram,

Pudukottai, Pudukottai District in S.C.No.132 of 2014 dated 20.06.2017 wherein the

trial Court acquitted A1 from the charges under Sections 452, 326, 294(b) and 307 of

IPC and A2 from the charges under Sections 452, 294(b) and 323 of IPC. As against

the acquittal judgment passed by the trial Court, the victim P.W.1 has preferred this

appeal.

2.The prosecution case is that on 09.10.2013 at about 08.00 a.m., both the

accused criminally trespassed into the house of the appellant and when the same was

questioned by the appellant, A1 abused in filthy language and assaulted with bill

book (aruval) towards neck and the same was restrained by the second respondent.

Thereby, she sustained injury at her right hand and left hand. A2 also abused obscene

words and assaulted her below the right eye. Already there was a civil dispute

pending between the parties and thereby, the accused developed the enmity with the

appellant and assaulted them. Thereafter, the appellant went to the Government

hospital through ambulance. Thereafter, the police went to the hospital and obtained

complaint, Ex.P1 and thereafter P.W.6 registered FIR, Ex.P7 and thereafter, P.W.7

has taken the case for investigation and examined the witnesses and collected

documents. Thereafter, P.W.8 investigated the case and filed final report for the

offence under Sections 452, 294(b), 307 of IPC as against A1 and Sections 452,

2 / 18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.(MD)No.356 of 2017

294(b), 323, 307 r/w. 34 of IPC as against A2. Thereafter, the learned District

Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thirumayam furnished the copies to the accused

under Section 207 of Cr.P.C., and then committed the case to the Principal District

Court, Pudukottai. The Principal District Judge, Pudukottai made over the case to the

learned Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram, Pudukottai. The trial Court has

framed the charges for the offence under Sections 452, 294(b), 307 of IPC as against

A1 and under Sections 452, 294(b), 323, 307 r/w. 34 of IPC as against A2. After

framing charges, the charges were read over and explained to the accused but the

accused denied the charges.

3.The prosecution had examined P.W.1 to P.W.8 and marked Exs.P.1 to

P.8 and marked M.O.1. On the side of the accused, no one was examined and no

document was marked. After examination of prosecution witnesses, the accused was

examined under Section 313(1)(b) of Cr.P.C., in respect of incriminating evidence as

against them and they denied the evidences.

4.Upon perusing the oral and documentary evidences, the trial Court

acquitted A1 from the charges under Sections 452, 326, 294(b) and 307 of IPC and

A2 from the charges under Sections 452, 294(b) and 323 of IPC. As against the

acquittal judgment passed by the trial Court, the victim P.W.1 has preferred th