PARAMASIVAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRL.A.No.1782/2003 is preferred by A1 and CRL.A.No.1744/2003 is preferred by A2 challenging their conviction and sentence passed on them by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, Chennai in SC.No.68/2002 by the Judgment dated 20.11.2003 convicting each of the accused for the offences u/s.120 [b], 147, 363, 419, 420 and 395 IPC and sentenced them as follows:- Accused Convicted under section Sentence awarded Fine amount awarded Sentence awarded if defaulted in payment of fine amount A1 and A2 120[b] IPC Each of the accused to undergo 2 years rigorous imprisonment. - - A1 and A2 147 IPC Each of the accused to undergo 2 years rigorous imprisonment. - - A1 and A2 363 IPC Each of the accused to undergo 5 years rigorous imprisonment. Rs.1,000/- to each of the accused. Each of the accused to undergo 2 months simple imprisonment. A1 and A2 419 IPC Each of the accused to undergo 2 years rigorous imprisonment. - - A1 and A2 420 IPC Each of the accused to undergo 5 years rigorous imprisonment. Rs.1,000/- to each of the accused. Each of the accused to undergo 2 months simple imprisonment. A1 and A2 395 IPC Each of the accused to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment. Rs.5,000/- to each of the accused. Each of the accused to undergo 6 months simple imprisonment. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) ORIGINALLY there are 6 accused in this case and A2 to A6 were absconding and as such, the cases against them have been split up. Therefore, only A1 and A2 have faced the trial and they have been convicted and sentenced as stated above.

(3.) WHEN the accused were questioned u/s.313 Cr.P.C., in respect of the incriminating materials available against them through the evidence adduced by the prosecution, they have come forward with the version of total denial and stated that they have been falsely implicated in the case. They have examined D.Ws.1 to 4 and filed Exs.D.1 to 6 on their side.