SENTHAMARAI Vs. S KRISHNARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. Krishnaraj, the husband becomes an approver against his own wife Senthamarai in a criminal proceeding. Having failed in her attempt to prevent the trial Court from tendering pardon to her husband and declaring him as an approver, the petitioner/wife is before this Court through this criminal revision petition challenging the order granting pardon.

(2.) On the complaint of one Dhanalakshmi Ammal, a case was registered against the petitioner Senthamarai and her husband Krishnaraj and others alleging that they fabricated the false and forged documents, the Will and Deed of Assumption with forged sinature of the said Dhanakshmi Ammal and her husband Nataraj Chettiar in order to get the entire properties in favour of Senthamarai and to have total control over the Institutions run by the Trust and got it registered with the Sub-Registrar at Rajapalayam on 4-7-1995. After finishing investigation, on 18-11-1999 the charge sheet was filed against Senthamarai/wife, Krishnaraj/husband, Palani Murugan, the Car Driver and one Balasubramaniam, the Sub-Registrar of Rajapalayam. The case was taken on file in C.C. No. 2 of 2000. Before the commencement of trial, husband Krishnaraj gave judicial confession to Judicial Magistrate-II, Srivilliputhur under Section 164, Cr. P.C. alleging that the said documents were forged and falsely fabricated with the help of all the accused in pursuance of conspiracy. Since the second accused husband wanted to become an approver, the CB CID, the prosecuting agency filed an application before the Judicial Magistrate-I, Virudhunagar under S. 306, Cr. P.C. in Crl. M.P. No. 2156 of 2000 requesting pardon for the said Krishnaraj on 28-6-2000. On the very same day, the first accused Senthamarai, the petitioner herein filed an objection. The trial Court after considering the petition and counter and hearing the counsel for the parties, passed an order on 28-7-2000 granting pardon to the second accused Krishnaraj. This is the subject matter of challenge in this revision.

(3.) Mr. Asokan, the learned senior counsel while assailing the impugned order would make the following contentions :