SHANMUGARAJA Vs. STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AL, A3 to A4 are the appellants in the above appeals. The appellants challenged their conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Magalir Neethimandram, Chennai, by the judgment dated 29.7.2005, in S.C. No. 666 of 2004 convicting the appellants as hereunder: <IMG>JUDGEMENT_301_MADLJ(CRI)1_2011Image1.jpg</IMG>

(2.) IT is brought to the notice of this Court that A2 who has been convicted for the offence under Section 366 IPC and sentenced to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to undergo, six months rigorous imprisonment has not preferred any appeal challenging his conviction and sentence and he has already served the sentence and released from the prison.

(3.) WHEN the accused were questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in respect of the incriminating materials appearing against them, all the accused have stated that they have been falsely implicated in this case. A1 has stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case. A1 further stated that he is innocent and on behalf of the victim girl (P.W.1) Rs. 50/- was received as per the arrangement as advance and P.W.I agreed to come during night. A2 has stated that he has taken P.W.I in auto as she has called him and dropped at Shanthi Theatre and left the place and he has been falsely implicated in this case. A3 stated that, she was selling tickets in a theatre. She has further stated that she has met P.W. 1 and on enquiry, P.W. 1 told her that she is from Pondicherry and she came to Chennai for earning money. A4 stated that he is a friend of A1. He has further stated he along with A5, went to All Women Police Station, to see A1. A5 has stated her, along with A4 went to All Women Police Station, to see A1.