Allowed

Shaik @ Shaik Maracaiyar v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC19 Oct 2016CRL A(MD)/181/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court allowed the criminal appeal filed under section 374 of Cr.P.C., setting aside the conviction and sentence passed by the First Additional District and Sessions Court, Thanjavur, and acquitted the appellant.

What did the court decide?

The conviction and sentence imposed by the lower court were set aside, and the appellant/Accused was acquitted. Any fine paid was to be refunded.

Shaik @ Shaik Maracaiyar Vs the Inspector of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Wednesday, the Nineteenth day of October, Two Thousand Sixteen

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Honble Mr.Justice S.NAGAMUTHU and The Honble Mr.Justice M.V.MURALIDARAN

¶6

CRL A(MD) No.181 of 2015

¶7

SHAIK @ SHAIK MARACAIYAR ... APPELLANT

¶8

STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KUMBAKONAM WEST POLICE STATION, KUMBAKONAM, THANJAVUR DIST, (CR.NO.952/2010)

¶9

... RESPONDENT

¶10

Prayer in Crl.A(MD)No.181 of 2015:

¶11

Criminal Appeal filed under section 374 of Cr.P.C. praying this court to call for the records from the lower court and set aside the judgment of the Lower Court passed by the First Additional District Sessions Court, (PCR), Thanjavur District in S.C.No.24 of 2012 dated 23.04.2015.

¶12

Order : This Appeal coming on for hearing on this day, upon perusing the grounds of appeal, judgment of the Lower Court, material papers of this Appeal and upon hearing the arguments of Mr.V.SASI KUMAR, for Mr.S.I.A.K.BAGADUR SHA, Advocate for the Appellant and Mr.C.MAYIL VAHANA RAJENDRAN, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent, this Court ordered as follows:

¶13

1.That the Criminal Appeal be and hereby is allowed;

¶14

2.That the conviction and sentence imposed on the Appellant/ accused by Judgment dated 23.04.2015 made in S.C.No.24 of 2012 passed by the learned First Additional District and Sessions Judge, (PCR), Thanjavur, is set aside and the Appellant/ Accused be and hereby is acquitted;

¶15

3.That the Fine amount, if any, paid by the Appellant/Accused shall be refunded to him;

¶16

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

¶17

¶18

4.That the appellant is directed to be released forthwith, unless his custody is required in connection with any other case. (Detailed Judgment will follow)

¶19

Sd/Assistant Registrar (RTI)

¶20

/True copy/

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

TO 1 THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE THANJAVUR

¶23

2 THE 1ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE (PCR) THANJAVUR

¶24

3 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE KUMBAKONAM, THANJAVUR DISTRICT

¶25

4 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL PRISON, TRICHY.

¶26

5 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL PRISON, PUZHAL-I, CHENNAI.

¶27

6 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KUMBAKONAM WEST POLICE STATION, KUMBAKONAM, THANJAVUR DISTRICT.

¶28

7 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶29

ORDER DATE :19.10.2016 ORDER

¶30

CRL A(MD) No.181 of 2015

¶31

Allowing the Appeal preferred against the Judgment dated 23.04.2015, the I Additional District and Sessions Court (PCR) Thanjavur District in S.C.No.24/2012 directions etc., given as stated within.

¶32

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ SH/SK-SKN/SAR-I:21.10.2016:2P/8C

Shaik @ Shaik Maracaiyar v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaik @ Shaik Maracaiyar v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Manivel Vs the Inspector of Police

Mayandi Vs the Inspector of Police

P. Ganesan Vs the Inspector of Police

Kirubanandan Vs the Inspector of Police

A.Armaas, S/O Ansar Ali, Vs the Inspector of Police

C. Mookan, Vs State Rep. by Its