A. STEPHEN RAJ Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner/sole Accused has projected the instant Criminal Revision Petition as against the Judgment dated 20/9/2012 in C.C.No.487 of 2011 passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Sankarankoil, Tirunelveli District.

(2.) The Learned Judicial Magistrate, Sankarankoil, while delivering the Judgment in C.C.No.487 of 2011, on 20/9/2012, has inter alia observed that "witnesses P.Ws.1 to 3 have turned hostile and also to prove the offences under Sections 294 (b), 323 and 506 (i) IPC, no other witnesses have been examined and further that P.Ws.1 and 2 in their evidence have not stated that the Petitioner/Accused has spoken in indecent words with a view to harm the reputation and also they have not spoken about the simple injury being caused by the Petitioner/Accused with his hands and that apart, they have also not deposed that the Petitioner/Accused has criminally intimidated them with a view to murder them and resultantly, has come to the conclusion that the charges levelled against the Petitioner/Accused under Sections 294 (b), 323 and 506 (i) IPC have not been proved and consequently, acquitted the Petitioner/Accused under Section 255 (1) of Cr.P.C.

(3.) The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner/Accused urges before this Court that the trial Court has acquitted the Petitioner/Accused by giving him the benefit of doubt and in fact, the trial Court should have acquitted the Petitioner/Accused honourably in view of the fact that the Respondent/Prosecution has not proved the charges against the Petitioner/Accused beyond all reasonable doubt.