High Court acquitted an appellant of charges for voluntary causing hurt and criminal intimidation upon accepting doubts regarding key prosecution witnesses, finding the genesis of injuries doubtful.
Judgment of District and Sessions Judge set aside; Petitioner acquitted of all charges; Bail bonds cancelled.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BAIL SLIP
The appellant/Petitioner/Accused namely Murugesan S/O.
Ramajeyan was directed to be releaseed on Bail as per the order of this court dated 23/09/2011 made in Crl.MP.2 of 2011 in Crl.R.C.No.1234/2011 on the file of this Court.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.08.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM
Crl.R.C.No.1234 of 2011
Murugesan
S/o.Ramajeyan
... Petitioner/Accused
-Vs-
State rep. by
Inspector of Police,
Kilaiyur Police Station,
Nagapattinam Taluk and District.
Crime No.299 of 2006.
... Respondent/Complainant
Criminal Revision filed under section 397 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against judgment dated 20.07.2011 passed by learned District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam, passed in C.A.No.87 of 2008 by modifying the judgement in C.C.No.501 of 2005 dated 05.12.2008 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Nagapattinam.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vadivel Murugan
This Criminal Revision Case arises against judgment of learned District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam, passed in C.A.No.87 of 2008 on 20.07.2011. The petitioner stood trial for offences under Sections 324 and 506(ii) IPC in case tried in C.C.No.501 of 2005 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Nagapattinam.
assailant to go free. However, Courts below have failed to see that when the presence of PW-2 brother of PW-1/injured, is doubtful and PW-7 the owner of the shop adjacent to the scene and who has been examined as an eye-witness of the occurrence, has turned hostile, the genesis and the manner in which PW-1 came to suffer injuries becomes doubtful and the benefit of such doubt ought to be afforded to the petitioner/accused.
Sd/-
ASST. REGISTRAR
/TRUE COPY/
SUB ASST. REGISTRAR
To
1.The District and Sessions Judge,
Nagapattinam.
2.The Judicial Magistrate-II,
Nagapattinam.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Kilaiyur Police Station,
Nagapattinam Taluk and District.
4. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Trichy
5.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
+1 CC to Mr. Mr.S.Vadivel Murugan Advocate SR.NO.61830
Crl.R.C.No.1234 of 2011
VC (16/11/2017)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether there are grounds to set aside the appellate conviction for voluntary causing hurt when the presence of a prosecution witness was doubtful and another key witness turned hostile.
Whether the benefit of doubt in the prosecution's witness accounts entitles the accused to acquittal.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Murugesan S/o. Ramajeyan
State rep. by Inspector of Police, Kilaiyur Police Station, Nagapattinam Taluk and District
C.T. Selvam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
