S. RAVIKUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The criminal appeal has been filed against the reversal judgment of acquittal passed by the learned VI Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, in C.A.No.182 of 2016 dtd. 7/12/2018, reversing the judgment dtd. 1/6/2016 in C.C.No.12250 of 2008 by the learned XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai.

(2.) Originally the first respondent police registered a case against the second respondent and two others for the offence under Sec. 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 r/w 468 and 109 IPC. After investigation, laid charge sheet, which was taken on file in C.C.No.12250 of 2018 by the learned XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai. In order to prove the charges, prosecution has examined as many as 17 witnesses as P.Ws.1 to 17 and marked 37 documents as Exs.P1 to P37. After completing examination of prosecution witnesses, incriminating circumstances culled out from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses were put before the accused they denied the same as false. On the side of the defence, no one was examined and no document was marked.

(3.) The learned Magistrate, after trial and hearing both the parties, by judgment dtd. 1/6/2016, convicted the second respondent alone and acquitted the other two accused from all the charges, and sentenced the second respondent to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000.00, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of eight weeks for each of the offence under Ss. 409 and 420 IPC, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of the Rs.3000.00, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of six weeks for each of the offence under Ss. 468 and 471 r/w 468 IPC, and ordered the sentence to run concurrently. Aggrieved over the judgment of conviction and sentence, the second respondent/A1 filed an appeal in C.A.No.182 of 2016 and the learned VI Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, after hearing both the parties, by judgment dtd. 7/12/2018 allowed the appeal by reversing the judgment of conviction and acquitted the appellant from all the charges.