A DEYADOSS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the judgment in s. C. No. 253 of 1998 on the file of VII Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai. There were totally 22 accused, who have been charged under Sections 147,148,341, 427, 452, 307,324,326 and 302 of IPC.

(2.) AFTER taking the case on file, the learned X Metropolitan magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, had issued summons to the accused and on their appearance , copies under Section 207 of Cr. P. C. were furnished to the accused and since the case is triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned X metropolitan Magistrate, had committed the case to the Principal Sessions judge, Chennai. On the appearance of the accused, the learned Sessions Judge had framed charges against the accused and when questioned the accused, pleaded not guilty.

(3.) WHEN the incriminating circumstances were put to the accused, they have denied their complicity with the crime.