SIVASANMUGHAM Vs. PUGALANDHI; INDIRAN; VINAYAGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Criminal Appeal arises out of the judgment of acquittal, dated 19.4.1999 in C.C.No.112 of 1993 on the file of the Additional District-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Chengalpattu, whereby, the respondents/A.1 to A.3 were acquitted of the offence under Section 342 IPC, the first respondent/A.1 was acquitted of the offence under Section 352 IPC and the second and third respondents/A.2 and A.3 were acquitted of the offence under Section 352 read with 109 IPC.

(2.) The case of the appellant-complainant (P.W.1) in the private complaint is that on 7.10.1993 at about 7.45 p.m., when P.W.2 Vijayamani was at his grocery shop along with his father P.W.5 Govindasamy, A-2 and A-3 came and took P.W.2 Vijayamani to Siva Kanchi Police Station, wherein A-1 Pugalendhi, Sub-Inspector of Police was there and at that time, along with A-1, D.W.1 Vijayakumari and her husband Sathyamurthy were also there. A-1 harassed and illegally confined P.W.2 Vijayamani and also questioned the whereabouts of the complainant P.W.1 Sivashanmugam and P.W.6 Ramesh. Immediately, A-1 directed A-2 and A-3 to go to the shop of Vijayamani and to bring P.W.1 Sivashanmugam, the complainant and P.W.3 Ramesh. When they were taken by A-2 and A-3, P.W.2 Vijayamani was put in the lock-up. P.W.1 Sivashanmugam, the complainant was assaulted by A-1 with lathi. A-1 also directed P.W.2 Vijayamani to bring seven silk sarees, two silk dhothies and five sovereign gold jewels and cash of Rs.3,000/- from the shop and hence, to avoid the same, A-2 and A-3 took P.W.2 Vijayamani to his shop and took Rs.3,000/- from the shop. Then P.W.2 Vijayamani handed over two silk dhothies and seven silk sarees and five sovereign gold jewels and handed over the same to A-2 and A-3 and they returned to Police Station at about 10 p.m. and handed over the same to A-1, and at that time, D.W.1 Vijayakumari and her husband Sathyamurthy were there. P.W.5 Govindasamy intimated the same to his friend, a retired Deputy Superintendent of Police, Chelladurai, at about 11 p.m. and intimated the same to the higher officials. Then only, P.Ws.1 to 3 were released from the Police Station. Immediately, they sent telegram to the higher officials. Since no steps have been taken, the complainant has come forward with the private complaint.

(3.) The trial Court, after following the procedures, framed necessary charges. The accused pleaded not guilty. Considering the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 7, D.W.1, Exs.P-1 and P-2 and Exs.D-1 to D-3, acquitted the respondents-A.1 to A.3.