LAWS(MAD)-2012-1-361

SRINIVASA PERUMAL Vs. STATION HOUSE OFFICER

Decided On January 30, 2012
SRINIVASA PERUMAL Appellant
V/S
STATION HOUSE OFFICER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is arrayed as A-4 in S.C. No. 290 of 2009, has come forward with this Criminal Revision Case questioning the correctness of the order dated 11.08.2011 in Crl.M.P. No. 84 of 2011 in S.C. No. 290 of 2009 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, Tindivanam, by which his petition to discharge him from the criminal prosecution was dismissed.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that one Jayaraman, who was also arrayed as A-10 in S.C. No. 290 of 2009, has given a complaint to the respondent police on 29.06.2009 relating to the murder of a women in the lodge namely 'Devi Lodge' which he had taken on lease. On the basis of his complaint, the case in Crime No. 502 of 2007 came to be registered on 29.06.2007 by the respondent for the offence under Section 302 of IPC. According to the complaint/A-10 he had taken the premises for running a lodge in the name and style of 'Devi Lodge' on lease from Dr. Santhanam for Rs.10,000/- per month. While so, during the course of his business, on 27.06.2007 at about 4.30 pm, a man and a women came to his lodge and sought for a room stating that they have come to Gingee in connection with their friend's wedding on 28.06.2007. On their request, after taking advance, room No.28 in the first floor was allotted to them. According to the complainant, room Nos. 16 to 20 in the first floor and 38, 40, 42, 47 and 48 were allotted to some other persons who had come for the wedding of one Sivakumar. In Room No.20, one Anandan, Radhakrishnan and Dharuman, who were later arrayed as A-1 to A-3, were staying and the key to the said room was directly given to the bridegroom Sivakumar. While so, on 29.06.2007, blood stains were found from room No. 28 to Room No.20 in the first floor which was kept locked till 2.00 pm on 29.06.2007. At about 3.00 pm, the room No.28 was opened by the complainant/A-10 with spare key where the deceased was found dead in the bathroom with her throat slit. According to the complainant, the man who accompanied the deceased could not be found in the room.

(3.) On the basis of this complaint, the respondent took up investigation and during the course of the investigation, he arrested some of the accused and ultimately filed the charge sheet on 19.09.2008 under Sections 376 (2) (g) read with 511 of IPC, 201 read with Section 302 of IPC, 202, 203, 506 (ii) and 302 of the IPC.