SUDARSAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the revision petitioners to set aside the Judgment, dated 27.09.2016 in C.A.No.101 of 2015 passed by the learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli District confirmed the Judgment, dated 11.08.2015 in S.C.No.271 of 2013 passed by the learned Sub-ordinate Judge, (Assistant Sessions Court), Ambasamudram.

(2.) As against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sub-ordinate Judge (Assistant Sessions Court), Ambasamudram, in S.C.No.271 of 2013, dated 24.11.2012, the revision petitioners have preferred an appeal before the learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli District, in C.A.No.101 of 2015. The lower Appellate Court, by judgment dated 27.09.2016, dismissed the appeal and convicted the first accused and sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 324 of IPC (one count) and the petitioners 1 to 3 were convicted under Section 341 of IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- each and totally to pay fine of Rs.600/- in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for seven days for the offence under Section 341 of IPC, was confirmed. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioners have preferred the instant criminal revision case.

(3.) The case of the prosecution is that on 04.12.2011 at about 14.30 hours, one logithasan S/o. Manickamuthu had lodged a complaint stating that he got married with one Rajeswari and the said petitioners have teased the complainant, while he was practicing the gym and due to that motive, L.W.3 has removed the same. Due to that motive on 04.12.2011 at about 09.00 a.m., the petitioners have detained P.W.2 and questioned the same, A1 attacked P.W.2 at that time, P.W.1 entered into the place of occurrence and he also sustained head injury, subsequently, P.W.7 has taken them to the hospital and hence, the respondent police received information on the same day and registered a case under Section 341, 294(b), 324, 307 and 506(ii) of IPC and subsequently, the respondent police filed charge sheet against the petitioners under Sections 294(b), 341, 324, 307 and 506(ii) of IPC r/w. 34 of IPC and A3, who is minor during the occurrence.