S. GANESAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner/Accused No.11 has preferred the instant Criminal Revision Petition as against the Judgment dated 28.04.2008 in C.C.No.27 of 2007 passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tirunelveli.

(2.) The Learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tirunelveli, while passing the Judgment in C.C.No.27 of 2007 on 28.04.2008 has among other things opined that "in the First Information Report filed before this Court, the time of Registration of the case has been corrected as '16.30 hours', but P.W.6 in his evidence has deposed that the First Information Report has been registered at about 11.30 a.m in the morning and resultantly held that the time of registration of the First Information Report has not been established beyond doubt on the side of the prosecution".

(3.) Further, the trial Court has also in the Judgment in paragraph No.9 has candidly observed that other than the Investigating Officers evidence, no witness has deposed that at the time of occurrence the accused were taking the sand in a clandestine fashion. Also, the trial Court has held that the confession statement of accused have not been recorded in the presence of witnesses concerned. Consequently, it has acquitted the Petitioner/Accused holding that the offence under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code levelled against him has not been proved to the subjective satisfaction of the Court and acquitted him under Section 248(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.