MALAYATHAL Vs. TIRUMURTHI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition preferred by the complaisant against the order dated 3rd November 1973, made in Cr. R.P. 6 of 1973 on the file of the court of the District Magistrate (J), Coimbatore, confirming the order made in P.R.C. 8 of 1973, on the file of the court of the Sub Magistrate, Pollachi (sic), discharging of the Respondent -accused.

(2.) P .R.C. No. 8 of 1973 arose on a private complaint filed by the present revision Petitioner against the accused for an offence under Ss. 143, 427, 307, 447 and 323, I.P C., alleging that the accused committed rioting with revolver, attempted to commit the murder of Malayathal (complainant) and one Tirumalaiswami, caused hurt to the said Tirumalaisaml and also committed criminal trespass into the land of the complainant on 7th September 1972 at 6 p.m., at Devanallur. Originally the case was filed in the court of the Sub Magistrate, Udumalpet, and the sworn statement was recorded from the complainant and the case was taken on file under Ss 307, 447 and 323, against all the accused and summonses were issued. Later, the case was transferred to the file of the Sub Magistrate, Pollachi, as per the orders of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Pollachi.

(3.) THE complainant examined P Ws. 1 to 7 and marked Ex P. 1 to P. 7 on her side. The accused, when examined, denied the allegations and states that accused 2 did not commit the offence and that the cart(sic) track is a common cart track in which he used to take carts and bulls and that P.W. 1 had wantonly filed this case after obsructing (sic) the bulls of accused 2 that evening. Accused 2 also requested that three registered deeds filed by him in his counter case C.C. 299 of 1973, against P.W. 2 to be read, as part of his statement in his case, which recognised the right of way in the scene place as early as 1913 and 1920 by the owners of the lands before they came to P.W. 1's husband. The accused also examined D.W. 1, the Medical officer at the Government Hospital, Udumalpet. On an examination of the entire evidence on record, both oral and documentary. The learned Sub Magistrate held that there was no prima facie case against any of the accused tor framing the charges under Ss 307, 323 and 447, I.P C. for being tried in the court of Session, and thus discharged all the accused under s. 299 (1), Crl. P.C. Against this order of discharge P.W. 1, the complainant filed Crl R.P 6 of 1973, before the District Magistrate (J) Coimbatore, and the learned District Magistrate, agreeing with the findings of the learned Sub Magistrate, confirmed the order of discharge and dismissed the said revision petition. It is as against this order, the present revision petition has been filed.